Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T06:25:59.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Incidence and Prevalence of Multiple Sclerosis in Newfoundland and Labrador

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2014

J.S. Sloka ,
W.E.M. Pryse-Phillips  and
M. Stefanelli
J.S. Sloka
Affiliation:
Faculty of Medicine (Neurology), Memorial University of Newfoundland, NL, Canada
W.E.M. Pryse-Phillips
Affiliation:
Faculty of Medicine (Neurology), Health Sciences Center, St., John’s, NL, Canada
M. Stefanelli
Affiliation:
Faculty of Medicine (Neurology), Health Sciences Center, St., John’s, NL, Canada
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background:

The incidence and prevalence of multiple sclerosis (MS) in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) had been reported in 1984 and was considered to be relatively low at that time. This study revisits the incidence and prevalence of MS in NL for the year 2001.

Methods:

Case searches through patient files of neurologists in NL were conducted. A complete list of patients billed for MS in NL between 1996 and 2003 was obtained and all cases were confirmed via chart review.

Results:

There were 493 living MS patients yielding a prevalence of 94.4/100,000 which is significantly higher than previously reported. Of the living patients, 330 had relapsing remitting (RRMS), 94 had secondary progressive, 66 had primary progressive (PPMS) and three had unspecified MS. The total female to male ratio was 2.7:1. There was no difference between the female to male ratios for RRMS vs PPMS. Patients with PPMS had a later onset compared to RRMS (p<0.00001). Yearly incidences were relatively constant from 1994 to 2001 (5.6/100,000). Significant delays between first symptoms and final diagnosis were common and the delay time has not changed over the past 15 years. A prevalence of 88.9/100,000 was estimated from survival and incidence trends and was not significantly different than the measured prevalence (p=0.38).

Conclusion:

The increase in incidence and prevalence are accounted for through both better access to diagnostic facilities and more practicing neurologists. The revised prevalence and incidence are more in keeping with recently reported values throughout Canada.

Conclusion:

L’augmentation de l’incidence et de la prÉvalence se justifient par une plus grande accessibilitÉ aux moyens diagnostiques et par la prÉsence d’un plus grand nombre de neurologues. La prÉvalence et l’incidence que nous rapportons sont plus conformes à celles rapportÉes rÉcemment à travers le Canada.

Résumé:

RÉSUMÉ:Introduction:

L’incidence et la prévalence de la sclérose en plaques (SEP) à Terre–Neuve et au Labrador (TNL) ont été rapportées en 1984 et elles étaient considérées comme basse à cette époque. Cette étude révise l’incidence et la prévalence de la SEP à TNLen 2001.

Méthodes:

Nous avons procédé à une recherche de cas dans les dossiers de neurologues de TNL. Une liste complète de patients dont la note d’honoraires mentionnait le diagnostic de SEP à TNL entre 1996 et 2003 a été compilée et tous les cas ont été confirmés par une revue de dossiers.

Résultats:

Il y avait 493 patients vivants atteints de SEP, soit une prévalence de 94,4/100,000 habitants, un chiffre nettement plus élevé que celui rapporté antérieurement. Parmi les patients vivants, 330 avaient la forme cyclique (SEPC), 94 la forme progressive secondaire (SEPPS), 66 la forme progressive primaire (SEPPP) et trois avaient une forme indéterminée. Le rapport femmes/hommes était de 2,7/1 et il n’y avait pas de différence entre le rapport femmes/hommes pour la SEPC et la SEPPP. Les patients atteints de SEPPP avaient un début plus tardif que ceux atteints de SEPC (p<0,00001). L’incidence annuelle était relativement constante de 1994 à 2001 (5,6/100,000). Un délai important entre les premiers symptômes et le diagnostic final était fréquent et la longueur de ce délai n’a pas changé au cours des 15 dernières années. Une prévalence de 88,9/100,000 a été stimée à partir des tendances de survie et d’incidence et n’était pas significativement différente de la prévalence mesurée (p=0,38).

Conclusions:

L’augmentation de l’incidence et de la prévalence se justifient par une plus grande accessibilité aux moyens diagnostiques et par la présence d’un plus grand nombre de neurologues. La prévalence et l’incidence que nous rapportons sont plus conformes à celles rapportées récemment à travers le Canada.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , February 2005 , pp. 37 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Journal of Neurological 2014

References

1. Paty, DW, Ebers, GC. Multiple Sclerosis. Contemporary Neurology Series. 1998; 50:48–138.Google Scholar
2. Noseworthy, JH, Lucchinetti, C, Rodriguez, M, et al. Multiplesclerosis. N Engl J Med 2000; 343:938–952.Google Scholar
3. Kurtzke, JF. Epidemiologic contributions to multiple sclerosis: anoverview. Neurology 1980; 30:61–79.Google Scholar
4. Weinshenker, BG. Epidemiologic strategies to detect an exogenouscause of MS. Acta Neurol Scand (Suppl) 1995; 161:93–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Lauer, K. Ecologic studies of multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1997; 49:S18–S26.Google Scholar
6. Olufemi, SE, Green, JS, Manickam, P, et al. Common ancestralmutation in the MEN1 gene is likely responsible for the prolactinoma variant of MEN1 (MEN1Burin) in four kindreds from Newfoundland. Hum Mutat 1998; 11:264–269.Google Scholar
7. Xie, YG, Zheng, H, Leggo, J, et al. A founder factor VIII mutation,valine 2016 to alanine, in a population with an extraordinarily high prevalence of mild hemophilia A. Thromb Haemost 2002; 87:178–179.Google Scholar
8. Spirio, L, Green, J, Robertson, J, et al. The identical 5’ splice-siteacceptor mutation in five attenuated APC families from Newfoundland demonstrates a founder effect. Hum Genet 1999; 105:388–398.Google Scholar
9. Heutink, P, Oostra, BA. Gene finding in genetically isolatedpopulations. Hum Mol Genet 2002; 11:2507–2515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Pericak-Vance, MA, Bebout, JL, Gaskell, PC Jr., et al. Linkagestudies in familial Alzheimer disease: evidence for chromosome 19 linkage. Am J Hum Genet 1991; 48:1034–1050.Google Scholar
11. Bertina, RM, Koeleman, BP, Koster, T, et al. Mutation in bloodcoagulation factor V associated with resistance to activatedprotein C. Nature 1994; 369:64–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Rahman, P, Jones, A, Curtis, J, et al. The Newfoundland population: aunique resource for genetic investigation of complex diseases. Hum Mol Genet 2003; 12 Spec No 2:R167-R172.Google Scholar
13. Mannion, JJ. The Peopling of Newfoundland: Essays in Historic Geography. St John’s: Memorial University of Newfoundland, 1977.Google Scholar
14. Statistics Canada 2001 Population Census 2001.Google Scholar
15. Bear, JC, Nemec, TF, Kennedy, JC, et al. Inbreeding in outport New foundland. Am J Med Genet 1988; 29:649–660.Google Scholar
16. Bear, JC, Nemec, TF, Kennedy, JC, et al. Persistent genetic isolationin outport Newfoundland. Am J Med Genet 1987; 27:807–830.Google Scholar
17. Martin, LJ, Crawford, MH, Koertvelyessy, T, et al. The population structure of ten Newfoundland outports. Hum Biol 2000; 72:997–1016.Google Scholar
18. Pryse-Phillips, WE. The incidence and prevalence of multiplesclerosis in Newfoundland and Labrador, 1960-1984. Ann Neurol 1986; 20:323–328.Google Scholar
19. Granieri, E, Casetta, I, Govoni, V, et al. The increasing incidence andprevalence of MS in a Sardinian province. Neurology 2000; 55:842–848.Google Scholar
20. Granieri, E, Casetta, I, Tola, MR. Epidemiology of multiple sclerosisin Italy and in southern Europe. Acta Neurol Scand (Suppl) 1995; 161:60–70.Google Scholar
21. Pugliatti, M, Sotgiu, S, Solinas, G, et al. Multiple sclerosisepidemiology in Sardinia: evidence for a true increasing risk. Acta Neurol Scand 2001; 103:20–26.Google Scholar
22. Schumacher, GA, Beebe, G, Kibler, RF, et al. Problems ofexperimental trials of therapy in multiple sclerosis: report by the panel on the evaluation of experimental trials of therapy in multiple sclerosis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1965; 122:552–568.Google Scholar
23. Poser, CM, Paty, DW, Scheinberg, L, et al. New diagnostic criteria formultiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol 1983; 13:227–231.Google Scholar
24. McDonald, WI, Compston, A, Edan, G, et al. Recommendeddiagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the international panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2001; 50:121–127.Google Scholar
25. Lublin, FD, Reingold, SC. Defining the clinical course of multiplesclerosis: results of an international survey. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (USA) Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials of New Agents in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology 1996; 46:907–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Kremenchutzky, M, Cottrell, D, Rice, G, et al. The natural history ofmultiple sclerosis: a geographically based study. 7. Progressive-relapsing and relapsing-progressive multiple sclerosis: a reevaluation. Brain 1999; 122 ( Pt 10):1941–1950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. McDonnell, GV, Hawkins, SA. Primary progressive multiplesclerosis: a distinct syndrome? Mult Scler 1996; 2:137–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Freeman, J, Hutchison, GB. Prevalence, incidence and duration. Am J Epidemiol 1980; 112:707–723.Google Scholar
29. Esteve, J, Benhamou, E, Raymond, L. Statistical methods in cancerresearch. Vol IV. Descriptive epidemiology. IARC Sci Publ 1994;1–302.Google Scholar
30. Mariotto, AB, Verdecchia, A. Using AIDS mortality data toreconstruct HIV/AIDS epidemics. Stat Med 2000; 19:161–174.Google Scholar
31. Verdecchia, A, Capocaccia, R, Egidi, V, et al. A method for theestimation of chronic disease morbidity and trends from mortality data. Stat Med 1989; 8:201–216.Google Scholar
32. Verdecchia, A, De Angelis, G, Capocaccia, R. Estimation andprojections of cancer prevalence from cancer registry data. Stat Med 2002; 21:3511–3526.Google Scholar
33. Colonna, M, Grosclaude, P, Launoy, G, et al. [Estimate of regionalprevalence of colorectal cancer in France]. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 2002; 50:243–251.Google Scholar
34. Noonan, CW, Kathman, SJ, White, MC. Prevalence estimates for MSin the United States and evidence of an increasing trend forwomen. Neurology 2002; 58:136–138.Google Scholar
35. Westlund, KB, Kurland, LT. Studies on multiple sclerosis inWinnepeg, Manitoba, and New Orleans, Louisiana. I. Prevalence; comparison between the patient groups in Winnipeg and New Orleans. Am J Hyg 1953; 57:380–396.Google Scholar
36. Stazio, A, Kurland, LT, Bell, LG, et al. Multiple sclerosis in Winnipeg,Manitoba: methdological considerations of epidemiologic survey. Ten year follow-up of a community wide study, and population re-survey. J Chronic Dis 1964; 17:415–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37. Sweeney, VP, Sadovnick, AD, Brandejs, V. Prevalence of multiplesclerosis in British Columbia. Can J Neurol Sci 1986; 13:47–51.Google Scholar
38. Hader, WJ. Prevalence of multiple sclerosis in Saskatoon. Can Med Assoc J 1982; 127:295–297.Google Scholar
39. Hader, WJ, Elliot, M, Ebers, GC. Epidemiology of multiple sclerosisin London and Middlesex County, Ontario, Canada. Neurology 1988; 38:617–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40. Klein, GM, Rose, MS, Seland, TP. A prevalence study of multiplesclerosis in the Crowsnest Pass region of southern Alberta. Can J Neurol Sci 1994; 21:262–265.Google Scholar
41. Warren, S, Warren, KG. Prevalence of multiple sclerosis in BarrheadCounty, Alberta, Canada. Can J Neurol Sci 1992; 19:72–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
42. Warren, S, Warren, KG. Prevalence, incidence, and characteristics ofmultiple sclerosis in Westlock County, Alberta, Canada. Neurology 1993; 43:1760–1763.Google Scholar
43. Svenson, LW, Woodhead, SE, Platt, GH. Regional variations in theprevalence rates of multiple sclerosis in the province of Alberta, Canada. Neuroepidemiology 1994; 13:8–13.Google Scholar