An interventional study of MS Boost and Standard of care in Multiple Sclerosis and Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic, sponsored by Ad scientiam. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-10-03.
Sponsored by Ad scientiam · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care
The main objective of the MS Boost study is to demonstrate the superiority of MSCopilot Boost over standard practice in reducing the impact of fatigue on Patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS).
The secondary objectives include validating MSCopilot Boost clinical performance in reducing fatigue and its impact as well as evaluating its functional tests performance and its safety of use. The investigation team will also investigate the effects of MSCopilot Boost on patient symptoms, functional parameters and physical activity levels. The investigation team will evaluate patients and healthcare professionals' perceived clinical benefit as well as adherence, satisfaction and user experience related to the mobile application and the web portal. Ultimately, the investigation team will define the medico-economic and organizational impact of the MSCopilot Boost solution.
Patients' expected benefits are the access to additional clinical tests not routinely performed, covering dimensions not addressed by standard tests like the EDSS for example; a remote monitoring of functional tests similar to those of the modified MSFC with the possibility of adding an evaluation of fatigue through digital questionnaires; improvement of symptoms related to MS fatigue through access to a personalised tele-rehabilitation program.
Healthcare professionals' expected benefits are to track objective measures of key functional symptoms of the disease between consultations, supporting MS patients' management and to gain time by providing a "big picture" of the patient's condition over time.
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune, inflammatory disease of the central nervous system that causes unpredictable neurological symptoms. It is the leading cause of non-traumatic disability in young adults in France. MS often leads to mobility impairments, visual problems (26% of patients), cognitive dysfunction (40-70%) and chronic fatigue, which affects more than 70% of patients. Fatigue, a major problem for 55% of patients, reduces energy, affects work capacity and increases sickness absence. Despite its importance, common clinical tools such as the EDSS and MSFC-4 do not assess fatigue.
MS-related fatigue is multifactorial, influenced by disease phenotype, comorbidities (e.g. depression, pain, sleep problems) and lifestyle factors. Fatigue assessments such as the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) and the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) are commonly used, but have validity issues and often require additional qualitative methods.
There is no clear consensus on the management of fatigue in MS. Pharmacological treatments show inconsistent results and non-pharmacological methods, particularly physical activity, are promising. Moderate exercise and resistance training improve symptoms and fitness, but no single exercise regimen is superior, so individualised approaches are needed. Multidisciplinary management combining physical activity, behavioural therapies and sometimes medications is increasingly recommended.
Most people with MS do not meet physical activity guidelines, highlighting the need for tailored exercise programmes. Mobile applications for remote monitoring and self-management offer promising solutions to enable patients to maintain activity and manage symptoms between medical visits.
Ad Scientiam has developed MSCopilot Boost, a medical software device that supports remote monitoring and management of MS symptoms. It includes a smartphone app with functional tests for walking, dexterity, vision, cognition and fatigue, and a telerehabilitation programme with personalised advice. Healthcare professionals can track patient progress via a web portal, making MSCopilot Boost a complementary tool to support consultations, rather than a stand-alone diagnostic device.
The primary objective of the MS Boost study is to demonstrate the efficacy of MSCopilot Boost in reducing the impact of fatigue in people with MS. Secondary objectives include evaluating its performance in reducing fatigue, improving functional testing, ensuring safety, and assessing its impact on symptoms and physical activity levels. The study also aims to measure patient and healthcare professional satisfaction, adherence and user experience with the app and web portal, and to define its organisational and economic impact.
Patients could benefit from additional clinical tests, real-time monitoring of functional parameters and a personalised fatigue management programme, while healthcare professionals would gain insight into patients' conditions over time, enabling more efficient management of MS-related symptoms.
3,264 studies on the registry are indexed under Multiple Sclerosis; 659 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 208 is above the median of 50 across 2,201 interventional studies indexed under Multiple Sclerosis.
Browse Multiple Sclerosis studies →Ad scientiam is the lead sponsor of 14 studies on the registry; 5 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: long-term lung disease that makes it hard to breathe out, including emphysema and chronic bronchitis.
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Anti-inflammatory medicines such as prednisone, prednisolone and dexamethasone — not the anabolic steroids used for muscle.
Studies differ in what they allow: check which steroid medicines, routes (tablets, injections, creams, inhalers, eye drops) and doses this study accepts.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
COPD
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: long-term lung disease that makes it hard to breathe out, including emphysema and chronic bronchitis.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Contraindication
A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Corticosteroids (steroids)
Anti-inflammatory medicines such as prednisone, prednisolone and dexamethasone — not the anabolic steroids used for muscle.
Studies differ in what they allow: check which steroid medicines, routes (tablets, injections, creams, inhalers, eye drops) and doses this study accepts.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
The Boost Group will have the MSCopilot Boost mobile application and follow personalized fatigue management advices and physical activity program
Device: MS Boost
The Control Group will follow standard of care with general fatigue advices
Other: Standard of care
remote monitoring digital tool based on functional tests (walking, dexterity, vision and cognition). These digital tests may be combined with a fatigue assessment via questionnaires and, if needed, a telerehabilitation program. This program includes an algorithm comprising fatigue management advice and/or physical activity recommendations personalised to the patients, aimed at improving fatigue-related symptoms. The patient can use the telerehabilitation program without supervision
General fatigue tips are given to patients who suffering from chronic fatigue such as stop smoking, eat a healthy diet...
To demonstrate that MSCopilot Boost is superior to standard practice in reducing the impact of fatigue on Patients with Multiple Sclerosis
Comparison of mean decrease in the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale score (MFIS) between Boost and Control groups from Day 0 to Day 270 . The criteria will be considered as positive if the Boost group shows a mean decrease of at least a 7 point in Day 270 score, compared to the Control group. The score ranges from 0 to 84, with a higher score indicating a worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To evaluate the impact of fatigue in both groups.
Measure of the mean decrease in Modified Fatigue Impact Scale score: * In the Boost group * Between Day 0 and Day 90 * Between Day 0 and Day 180 * Between Day 0 and Day 270 * In the Control group * Between Day 0 and Day 90 * Between Day 0 and Day180 * Between Day 0 and Day 270 The score ranges from 0 to 84, with a higher score indicating a worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the effect of MSCopilot Boost in reducing fatigue impact compared to standard practice (Short term and Medium term)
Comparison of the mean decrease in Modified Fatigue Impact Scale score: * Between Day 0 and Day 90 * Between Day 0 and Day 180 The score ranges from 0 to 84, with a higher score indicating a worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180)
To compare the fatigue impact between the two groups.
Comparison of Modified Fatigue Impact Scale score between the two groups: * At Day 90 * At Day 180 * At Day 270 The score ranges from 0 to 84, with a higher score indicating a worse outcome.
Time frame: During the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the effect of MSCopilot Boost in reducing perceived fatigue compared to standard practice.
Comparison of the mean fatigue score by using a visual analog scale (from daily activities impact questionnaire) between the two groups: * Between Day 0 and Day 90 * Between Day 0 and Day 180 * Between Day 0 and Day 270 Score ranges from 0 (not impacted) to 10 (very impacted), with a higher score indicating a worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
Correlation of MSCopilot Boost functional test performed autonomously at home with its standard counterpart performed under supervised conditions at the hospital.
Pearson correlation coefficient to evaluate the correlation between the active Mobile Walking Perimeter Test (in meter) performed at Day 1 (at home) with the standard test Timed 25 Foot Walk (in seconds) performed at Day 0 (at the hospital) in the Boost group.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the first at-home visit (Day 1)
Correlation of MSCopilot Boost functional test performed autonomously at home with its standard counterparts performed under supervised conditions at the hospital.
Pearson correlation coefficient to evaluate the correlation between the active Mobile Walking Endurance Test (in meters) performed at Day 1 (at home) with the standard test Timed 25 Foot Walk (in seconds) performed at Day 0 (at the hospital) in the Boost group.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the first at-home visit (Day 1)
Correlation of MSCopilot Boost functional test performed autonomously at home with its standard counterpart performed under supervised conditions at the hospital.
Pearson correlation coefficient to evaluate the correlation between the active Mobile Dexterity Test (in seconds) performed at Day 1 (at home) with the standard test 9 Hole Peg Test (in seconds) performed at Day 0 (at the hospital) in the Boost group.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the first at-home visit (Day 1)
Correlation of MSCopilot Boost functional test performed autonomously at home with its standard counterpart performed under supervised conditions at the hospital.
Pearson correlation coefficient to evaluate the correlation between the active Mobile Cognition Test (score) performed at Day 1 (at home) with the standard Symbol Digit Modalities Test (score) performed at Day 0 (at the hospital) in the Boost group.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the first at-home visit (Day 1)
Correlation of MSCopilot Boost functional test performed autonomously at home with its standard counterpart performed under supervised conditions at the hospital.
Pearson correlation coefficient to evaluate the correlation between the active Mobile Vision Test (number stated) performed at Day 1 (at home) with the standard Sloan Low Contrast Letter Acuity Test (number of letter stated) performed at Day 0 (at the hospital) in the Boost group. Higher is the number of letter or number stated, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the first at-home visit (Day 1)
Correlation of the answers of MSCopilot Boost questionnaire performed autonomously with its standard counterpart performed under supervised conditions at the hospital
Intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess the correlation between electronic and standard version of the Daily activities impact questionnaire completed by patients at Day 0 and Day 270. The score ranges from 0 to 10, with higher score meaning worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
Correlation of the answers of MSCopilot Boost questionnaire performed autonomously with its standard counterpart performed under supervised conditions at the hospital
Intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess the correlation between electronic and standard version of the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale-5 questionnaire completed by patients at Day 0 and Day 270. Score ranges from 0 to 20, with higher score meaning worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
Correlation of the answers of MSCopilot Boost questionnaire performed autonomously with its standard counterpart performed under supervised conditions at the hospital
Intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess the correlation between electronic and standard version of the Sleep questionnaire completed by patients at Day 0 and Day 270.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
Correlation of the answers of MSCopilot Boost questionnaire performed autonomously with its standard counterpart performed under supervised conditions at the hospital
Intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess the correlation between electronic and standard version of the Mental well-being (PHQ-4) questionnaire completed by patients at Day 0 and Day 270. Score ranges from 0 to 12, with higher score meaning worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
Correlation of the answers of MSCopilot Boost questionnaire performed autonomously with its standard counterpart performed under supervised conditions at the hospital
Intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess the correlation between electronic and standard version of the Physical Activity Level questionnaire (IPAQ) completed by patients at Day 0 and Day 270.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
Correlation of the reproductibility of MSCopilot Boost functional test from the hospital to home.
Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess the reproducibility between the Mobile Walking Perimeter Test (in meters) performed at hospital and at home * At Day 0 and Day 1 * At Day 89 and Day 90 Higher is the distance, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), the first at-home visit (Day 1), the follow-up visit at-home (Day 89) and the follow-up visit in-clinic (Day 90)
Correlation of the reproductibility of MSCopilot Boost functional test from the hospital to home.
Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess the reproducibility between the Mobile Dexterity Test (in seconds) performed at hospital and at home * At Day 0 and Day 1 * At Day 89 and Day 90 Shorter is the time, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), the first at-home visit (Day 1), the follow-up visit at-home (Day 89) and the follow-up visit in-clinic (Day 90)
Correlation of the reproductibility of MSCopilot Boost functional test from the hospital to home.
Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess the reproducibility between the Mobile Cognition Test performed at hospital and at home * At Day 0 and Day 1 * At Day 89 and Day 90 Higher is the score, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), the first at-home visit (Day 1), the follow-up visit at-home (Day 89) and the follow-up visit in-clinic (Day 90)
Correlation of the reproductibility of MSCopilot Boost functional test from the hospital to home.
Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess the reproducibility between the Mobile Vision Test performed at hospital and at home * At Day 0 and Day 1 * At Day 89 and Day 90 Higher is the number or letter stated, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), the first at-home visit (Day 1), the follow-up visit at-home (Day 89) and the follow-up visit in-clinic (Day 90)
To evaluate the test-retest reliability of MSCopilot Boost functional test performed at home.
Intra class correlation coefficient coefficient will be used to evaluate the reliability of the Mobile walking perimeter test (in meter) performed at home at Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240. Higher is the distance, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the at-home follow-up visits (Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240)
To evaluate the test-retest reliability of MSCopilot Boost functional test performed at home.
Intra class correlation coefficient coefficient will be used to evaluate the reliability of the Mobile Dexterity Test (in seconds) performed at home at Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240. Shorter is the time, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the at-home follow-up visits (Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240)
To evaluate the test-retest reliability of MSCopilot Boost functional test performed at home.
Intra class correlation coefficient coefficient will be used to evaluate the reliability of the Mobile cognition Test (score) performed at home at Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240. Higher is the score, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the at-home follow-up visits (Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240)
To evaluate the test-retest reliability of MSCopilot Boost functional tests performed at home.
Intra class correlation coefficient coefficient will be used to evaluate the reliability of the Mobile vision test (number of letter stated) performed at home at Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240. Higher is the number or letter stated, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the at-home follow-up visits (Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240)
To evaluate the test-retest reliability of MSCopilot Boost functional tests performed at home.
Intra class correlation coefficient coefficient will be used to evaluate the reliability of the Mobile Walking Endurance test (in meters) performed at home at Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240. Higher is the distance, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the at-home follow-up visits (Day 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240)
To assess the number of adverse events of using MSCopilot Boost.
The application's safety of use will be assessed through a descriptive analysis of adverse events and Adverse Events associated with its use. Data relative to Adverse Events will be reported on a table, numbers and percentages reported for each group, categorizing Adverse Events as mild, moderate and severe. A descriptive analysis of risk questionnaire responses in the Boost group will also be performed.
Time frame: Throughout the study for all visits in-clinic (Day 0, Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270) and at-home visits (Day 1, D 30, Day 60, Day 89, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240)
To compare the effect of MSCopilot Boost on walking compared to standard practice: -Assessed by the functional standard test performed at the hospital -Assessed at home
Comparison of mean improvement in results between the two groups: * For the Timed 25 Foot Walk test (in seconds) * Between Day 0 and Day 90 * Between Day 0 and Day 180 * Between Day 0 and Day 270 * Measured by actimeter: * Between Day 0 and Day 90 * Between Day 0 and Day 180 * Between Day 0 and Day 270 Shorter is the time, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the proportion of patients whose symptoms improved in both groups on Fatigue impact.
Comparison of patients considered as improved at Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270 in both groups on the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) The score ranges from 0 to 84, with a higher score indicating a worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the proportion of patients whose symptoms improved in both groups on anxiety and depression.
Comparison of patients considered as improved at Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270 in both groups on the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) Score ranges from 0 to 12, with higher score indicating worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the proportion of patients whose symptoms improved in both groups on Depression.
Comparison of patients considered as improved at Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270 in both groups on the Beck Depression Inventory - Fast Screen (BDI- FS). The score ranges from 0 to 21, with higher score indicating worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the proportion of patients whose symptoms improved in both groups on Fatigue.
Comparison of patients considered as improved at Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270 in both groups on Fatigue with visual analog scale (from daily activities impact questionnaire) The score ranges from 0 to 10, with higher score indicating worse outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the proportion of patients whose symptoms improved in both groups on Walking.
Comparison of patients considered as improved at Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270 in both groups on the Timed 25 Foot Walk test (in seconds). Shorter is the time, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the proportion of patients whose symptoms improved in both groups on Dexterity.
Comparison of patients considered as improved at Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270 in both groups on the 9 Hole Peg Test (in seconds). Shorter time indicating better outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the proportion of patients whose symptoms improved in both groups on Cognition.
Comparison of patients considered as improved at Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270 in both groups on the Symbol Digit Modalities Test. Higher is the score, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the proportion of patients whose symptoms improved in both groups on the Low-contrast Vision.
Comparison of patients considered as improved at Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270 in both groups on the Sloan Low Contrast Letter Acuity Test (number stated). Higher is the number or letter stated, better is the outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the effect of MSCopilot Boost on quality of life compared to standard practice.
Comparison of mean improvement in EQ5D-5L results between the two groups: * Between Day 0 and Day 90 * Between Day 0 and Day 180 * Between Day 0 and Day 270 The scale ranges from 0 to 100, with higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To compare the effect of MSCopilot Boost on the mean overall physical activity compared to standard practice.
Comparison of the evolution of the mean overall physical activity in Metabolic Equivalent of Task (MET) measured by actimeter between the two groups: * Between Day 0 and Day 90 * Between Day 0 and Day 180 * Between Day 0 and Day 270
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To evaluate the satisfaction and user experience of both patients and healthcare professionals regarding MSCopilot Boost.
Descriptive analysis of responses collected from satisfaction and user experience questionnaires in the Boost group and from healthcare professionals. Each answer propose a scale from 1 to 5 or 1 to 10. Higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: During at-home follow-up visit (Day 30) and in-clinic visits (Day 180 and Day 270)
To assess the clinical benefit of MSCopilot Boost reported by patients and healthcare professionals.
Descriptive analysis of collected responses from clinical benefit questionnaires in Boost group and from healthcare professionals. Each answer propose a scale form 1 to 10 with higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: During the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To assess the organizational impact of MSCopilot Boost as reported by healthcare professionals.
Descriptive analysis of collected responses from organizational impact questionnaire administered to healthcare professionals. Each answer propose 5 levels of intensity from totally disagree to totally agree.
Time frame: During the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To assess user compliance with MSCopilot Boost throughout the follow-up period.
Number of completed evaluations per quarter compared to the theoretical maximum completion expected over time in the Boost group: * Functional tests * Fatigue evaluation questionnaires * Fatigue management program (tips and physical activity program)
Time frame: Throughout the study for all visits in-clinic (Day 0, Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270) and at-home visits (Day 1, D 30, Day 60, Day 89, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240)
To evaluate the link between MSCopilot Boost use compliance and fatigue improvement.
Correlation coefficient between MSCopilot Boost use compliance and Modified Fatigue Impact Scale score and comparison of the mean compliance pourcentage between patients who experienced a clinically significant improvement in fatigue and those who did not.
Time frame: Throughout the study for all visits in-clinic (Day 0, Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270) and at-home visits (Day 1, D 30, Day 60, Day 89, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240)
To assess the relationship between self-reported and objectively measured physical activity.
Correlation coefficient between self-reported physical activity in MSCopilot Boost and objectively measured physical activity by actimeter in the Boost group.
Time frame: Throughout the study from Day 0 to Day 270
To explore the factors that might influence the effect of MSCopilot Boost on fatigue and its impact.
Evaluation of the interaction terms between the Boost patient group versus the control patient group and covariates (socio-demographic characteristics, depression, compliance, physical activity, etc…) in a multivariate regression model with response variables: * The Modified Fatigue Impact Scale score * Fatigue with Visual analog scale score (from daily activities impact questionnaire)
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To assess the changes in sleep patterns and areas of life impacted by fatigue, as measured with MSCopilot Boost at home.
Descriptive analysis of responses collected from sleep and daily activities questionnaires in the Boost group. Visual Analog Scale ranges from 0 (not impacted) to 10 (very impacted), with a higher score indicating a worse outcome.
Time frame: Throughout the study for all visits in-clinic (Day 0, Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270) and at-home visits (D 30, Day 60, Day 120, Day 150, Day 210 and Day 240)
To assess the evolution of overall physical activity reported by patients.
Measure of the average self-reported overall physical activity in MSCopilot Boost application each week between Day 0 and Day 270 by the Boost group.
Time frame: Throughout the study from Day 0 to Day 270
To explore the correlation between overall physical activity and the change in : -Fatigue impact -Fatigue
Correlation coefficient assessed between the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale and physical activity (Self-reported and measured by actimeter) with the scores on the fatigue reported with a visual analog scale (from daily activities impact questionnaire) and physical activity (Self-reported and measured by actimeter). Visual analog scale ranges from 0 to 10. Higher score means better outcome.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
Calculation of cost-effectiveness in reducing fatigue at 1, 3, 6 and 9 months using MSCopilot Boost as an intervention, compared to standard care.
Average cost mean (estimated by the number and type of hospital admissions and unscheduled medical visits) between the two groups, adjusted for the difference of quality of life between the two groups.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To assess the impact of MSCopilot Boost on work-related factors (duration without working, absenteeism from work, return-to-work time, presenteeism) at 3, 6 and 9 months, compared to baseline (Day 0), in both groups.
Mean duration without working, average number of absenteeism days, average return-to-work time, and presenteeism duration within the past 6 months will be calculated at Day 0, Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the in-clinic follow-up visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
To evaluate behavioral changes in terms of physical activity and energy management.
Comparison of physical activity volume and energy-saving management routines at Day 0, Day 30, Day 90, Day 180 and Day 270 in both groups.
Time frame: During the first in-clinic visit (Day 0), during the follow-up at-home visit (Day 30), during the follow-up in-clinic visits (Day 90 and Day180) and the end of study visit in-clinic (Day 270)
No study locations are listed for this record.
Start is estimated for Dec 2026; primary completion for Aug 2027, 8 months later.
Of 847 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Multiple Sclerosis, half reached primary completion within 22 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 8 and three quarters within 43. This study's planned 8 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 869 studies reached it within 21 months; a quarter within 9 and three quarters within 43.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Ad scientiam