Objective We describe and compare the sociodemographic and clinical features, treatments, and prognoses and survival times of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in Africa.
Methodology We conducted a multicentre, hospital-based cohort study in Africa. Patients with ALS diagnosed in the neurology departments of participating hospitals from 2005 to 2017 were included. Subgroup analysis was performed by subcontinent. Survival analyses were conducted using the Cox proportional hazards model.
Results Nine centres from eight African countries participated. A total of 185 patients with ALS were included: 114 from Northern Africa, 41 from Western Africa and 30 from Southern Africa. A male predominance (male to female ratio 2.9) was evident. The median age at onset was 53.0 years (IQR 44.5–64.0 years). The onset was bulbar in 22.7%. Only 47 patients (26.3%) received riluzole, mainly in Northern and Western Africa. The median survival from the time of diagnosis was 14.0 months (95% CI 10.7 to 17.2 months). The median survival was longer in Northern Africa (19.0 months, 95% CI 10.8 to 27.2 months) than in Western (4.0 months, 95% CI 0.8 to 7.1 months) and Southern (11.0 months, 95% CI 5.6 to 16.4 months) Africa (Breslow test, p<0.0001). Both subcontinental location and riluzole treatment independently affected survival.
Conclusion More African patients with ALS were male and younger and exhibited a lower proportion of bulbar onset compared with patients with ALS from Western nations. Survival was consistent with that in Western registers but far shorter than what would be expected for young patients with ALS. The research improves our understanding of the disease in Africa.
- amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
- clinical features
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
PMP and BM contributed equally.
Collaborators TROPALS Collaboration (in alphabetical order of country): Algeria-Alger: Leila Ait Aissa, Lamia Ali Pacha, Meriem Tazir; Algeria-Annaba: Toubal Nadia; Benin: Constant Adjien, Atokè Mendinatou Agbetou, Gilbert Avode, Dismand Houinato; Burkina Faso: Athanase Millogo; France: Philippe Couratier, Bello Hamidou, Jaime Luna, Benoît Marin, Marie Penoty, Pierre Marie Preux, Marie Raymondeau-Moustafa; Gabon: Yvonne Assegone Zeh, Philomène Kouna Ndouongo, Gertrude Mouangue, Edgard Ngoungou; Guinea: Fode Abass Cisse, Amara Cisse, Lansana Laho Diallo; Mali: Sara Diakite, Youssoufa Maiga; Mauritania: Mouhamadou Diagana, Cheikh Ould Hace, Abderrahmane Moulaye; Senegal: Anna Basse, Ousmane Cisse, Amadou Gallo Diop, Ndiaye Mansour; South Africa: Franclo Henning; Togo Lome I: Kombate Damelan, Agnon A Koffi Balogou; Togo Lome II: Thierry Agba, Mouftao Belo, Anayo Nyinévi; Tunisia: Amina Gargouri, Riadh Gouider, Imen Kacem.
Contributors All authors contributed significantly to this paper. PMP, BM and MD conceived the study. PMP, BM MD and PC established the objectives and the study design. MD, LAA, MT, LAP, IK, RG, FH, AB, OC, AAKB, DK, MA, DH, AM, TA and MB contributed to data acquisition. MN, BH, MR and JL performed management and validation of the data. PC reviewed the medical records. All authors contributed to interpretation of the results. JL, BH and BM performed statistical analyses. JL wrote the first manuscript version. All authors contributed to the final manuscript in terms of intellectual content.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Obtained.
Ethics approval The TROPALS study followed all the dictates of the Declaration of Helsinki and was reviewed in July 2011 by an institutional review board (Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud-Ouest et Outre-mer IV, Limoges, France). All data were anonymised to protect privacy.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.