Skip to main content

The use of Modified Rio score for determining treatment failure in patients with multiple sclerosis: retrospective descriptive case series study

A Correction to this article was published on 07 March 2022

This article has been updated


Predicting treatment failure and switching effective treatment immediately in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) is important. We aimed to evaluate the usefulness of Modified Rio score (MRS) in predicting treatment failure in MS patients. This is a retrospective study, which was conducted in two University Hospital. 129 MS patients treated with İnterferon or glatiramer-acetate from 2 clinical sites, were retrospectively selected. MRS was calculated after the first year of therapy. Treatment failure was defined as the presence of a 1 point increase in EDSS, 2 clinical attacks, 1 clinical attack and progression, 1 clinical attack and new lesion on MRI except associated with an attack, or new lesion in 2 different MRI taken at least 3 months apart. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the MRS in predicting treatment failure were determined. 71 (55%) patients with score ‘0’, 41 (31.8%) patients with score ‘1’, 11 (8.5%) patients with score ‘2’, 6 (4.7%) patients with score ‘3’ were detected. 14 patients needed treatment switching during the first three years of the treatment. Sensitivity was 57%, specificity was 92%, positive predictive value was 95%, negative predictive value was 47% and accuracy was 89%. Modified Rio score (MRS) was found to be effective in determining the treatment failure as mentioned before. This study will be useful for clinicians who evaluate the treatment failure like us, and this study revealed that the MRS may also help predict treatment failure.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Change history


  1. Annibali V et al (2006) Multiple sclerosis: Pharmacogenomics and personalised drug treatment. Neurol Sci 27(SUPPL. 5):347–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Karussis D (2014) The diagnosis of multiple sclerosis and the various related demyelinating syndromes a critical review. J Autoimmune 48–9:134–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Caniglia-Tenaglia M et al (2018) Multiple sclerosis in the Republic of San Marino, Italian peninsula: an incidence and prevalence study from a high-risk area. Neurol Sci 39(7):1231–1236.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Çelik Y, Birgili O, Yılmaz H, Kıyat A, Saip S, Siva A, Güldiken B, Ozkan H, Kuscu D, Sutlas N, Agaoglu J, Utku U (2011) Prevalence of multiple sclerosis in the metropolitan area of Edirne city, Turkey. J Balkan Med 28:193–196

    Google Scholar 

  5. Akdemir N, Terzi M, Arslan N, Onar M (2017) Prevalence of multiple sclerosis in the middle black sea region of turkey and demographic characteristics of patients. J Neuropsychiatry 54(1):11–14

    Google Scholar 

  6. Turkboru U, Alp R, Sur H, Gul L (2006) Prevalence of multiple sclerosis: door to door survey in Maltepe, Istanbul, Turkey. Neuroepidemology 27:17–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kantarci OH (2019) Phases and phenotypes of multiple sclerosis. Contin Lifelong Learn Neurol 25(3):636–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Confavreux C, Vukusic S, Moreau T, Adeleine P (2000) Relapses and progression of disability in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Montalban X et al (2009) Primary progressive multiple sclerosis diagnostic criteria: a reappraisal. Multiple Sclerosis.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rotstein D, Montalban X (2019) Reaching an evidence-based prognosis for personalized treatment of multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Neurol 15(5):287–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gasperini C et al (2019) Unraveling treatment response in multiple sclerosis: a clinical and MRI challenge. Neurology 92(4):180–192.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Río J et al (2009) Measures in the first year of therapy predict the response to interferon β in MS. Multiple Scler 15(7):848–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sormani MP et al (2013) Scoring treatment response in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Multiple Scler J 19(5):605–612.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Romeo M et al (2015) Validation of 1-year predictive score of long-term response to interferon-β in everyday clinical practice multiple sclerosis patients. Eur J Neurol 22(6):973–980.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sormani MP et al (2016) Assessing response to interferon-β in a multicenter dataset of patients with MS. Neurology 87(2):134–140.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Drulovic J et al (2019) Long-term disability outcomes in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a 10-year follow-up study. Neurol Sci 40(8):1627–1636.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hentati E, Ben Sassi S, Nabli F, Mabrouk T, Zouari M, Hentati F (2018) Disability progression in multiple sclerosis: a Tunisian prospective cohort study. Neurol Sci 39(5):879–884.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Río J et al (2018) Disability progression markers over 6–12 years in interferon-β-treated multiple sclerosis patients. Multiple Scler J 24(3):322–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sormani MP, Bruzzi P (2013) MRI lesions as a surrogate for relapses in multiple sclerosis: a metaanalysis of randomised trials. Lancet Neurol 12(7):669–676.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hyun JW et al (2015) Utility of the Rio score and modified Rio score in Korean patients with multiple sclerosis. PLoS ONE 10(5):1–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Río J et al (2006) Defining the response to interferon-β in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients. Ann Neurol 59(2):344–352.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mesude Tutuncu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethics statement

The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee and carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tutuncu, M., Altintas, A., Dogan, B.V. et al. The use of Modified Rio score for determining treatment failure in patients with multiple sclerosis: retrospective descriptive case series study. Acta Neurol Belg 121, 1693–1698 (2021).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


  • Multiple sclerosis
  • Treatment response
  • Disability