• NIHSS and stroke tools

    NIHSS and stroke tools

    All the tools you need for stroke management

    Read more

  • Easy EDSS Score

    Easy EDSS Score

    An innovating and simplified way to rate EDSS score in MS

    Read more

  • Coma Scales

    Coma Scales

    Glasgow coma scale & more on your Apple Watch

    Read more

  • Cardio SCORE

    Cardio SCORE

    SCORE charts and cardiovascular tools

    Read more

  • Medical Calc on Apple Watch

    Medical Calc on Apple Watch

    The best medical calculator available on Apple Watch

    Read more

  • Productivity apps

    Productivity apps

    Powerful productivity tools on iOS & Apple Watch

    Read more

Welcome on this brand new website!

You'll now be able to find information about our medical apps at www.mikeiosapps.com. Don't hesitate to visit our social media pages to stay in contact!

On this blog, you'll regularly find articles about Neurology and Digital Health, as well as news about our apps releases. 


This MSBase study, published in The Lancet Neurology, suggests a higher efficacy of alemtuzumab and natalizumab compared to other disease modifying therapies in active relapsing remitting MS.
Read the article here


Alemtuzumab, an anti-CD52 antibody, is proven to be more efficacious than interferon beta-1a in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, but its efficacy relative to more potent immunotherapies is unknown. We compared the effectiveness of alemtuzumab with natalizumab, fingolimod, and interferon beta in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis treated for up to 5 years.


In this international cohort study, we used data from propensity-matched patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis from the MSBase and six other cohorts. Longitudinal clinical data were obtained from 71 MSBase centres in 21 countries and from six non-MSBase centres in the UK and Germany between Nov 1, 2015, and June 30, 2016. Key inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of definite relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, exposure to one of the study therapies (alemtuzumab, interferon beta, fingolimod, or natalizumab), age 65 years or younger, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score 6·5 or lower, and no more than 10 years since the first multiple sclerosis symptom. The primary endpoint was annualised relapse rate. The secondary endpoints were cumulative hazards of relapses, disability accumulation, and disability improvement events. We compared relapse rates with negative binomial models, and estimated cumulative hazards with conditional proportional hazards models.


Patients were treated between Aug 1, 1994, and June 30, 2016. The cohorts consisted of 189 patients given alemtuzumab, 2155 patients given interferon beta, 828 patients given fingolimod, and 1160 patients given natalizumab. Alemtuzumab was associated with a lower annualised relapse rate than interferon beta (0·19 [95% CI 0·14–0·23] vs 0·53 [0·46–0·61], p<0·0001) and fingolimod (0·15 [0·10–0·20] vs 0·34 [0·26–0·41], p<0·0001), and was associated with a similar annualised relapse rate as natalizumab (0·20 [0·14–0·26] vs 0·19 [0·15–0·23], p=0·78). For the disability outcomes, alemtuzumab was associated with similar probabilities of disability accumulation as interferon beta (hazard ratio [HR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·36–1·22], p=0·37), fingolimod (1·27 [0·60–2·70], p=0·67), and natalizumab (0·81 [0·47–1·39], p=0·60). Alemtuzumab was associated with similar probabilities of disability improvement as interferon beta (0·98 [0·65–1·49], p=0·93) and fingolimod (0·50 [0·25–1·01], p=0·18), and a lower probability of disability improvement than natalizumab (0·35 [0·20–0·59], p=0·0006).


Alemtuzumab and natalizumab seem to have similar effects on annualised relapse rates in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Alemtuzumab seems superior to fingolimod and interferon beta in mitigating relapse activity. Natalizumab seems superior to alemtuzumab in enabling recovery from disability. Both natalizumab and alemtuzumab seem highly effective and viable immunotherapies for multiple sclerosis. Treatment decisions between alemtuzumab and natalizumab should be primarily governed by their safety profiles.

Read this review article published recently in The Lancet Neurology about the interest of using mobile stroke units to improve management in the acute phase.


In acute stroke management, time is brain. Bringing swift treatment to the patient, instead of the conventional approach of awaiting the patient's arrival at the hospital for treatment, is a potential strategy to improve clinical outcomes after stroke. This strategy is based on the use of an ambulance (mobile stroke unit) equipped with an imaging system, a point-of-care laboratory, a telemedicine connection to the hospital, and appropriate medication. Studies of prehospital stroke treatment consistently report a reduction in delays before thrombolysis and cause-based triage in regard to the appropriate target hospital (eg, primary vs comprehensive stroke centre). Moreover, novel medical options for the treatment of stroke patients are also under investigation, such as prehospital differential blood pressure management, reversal of warfarin effects in haemorrhagic stroke, and management of cerebral emergencies other than stroke. However, crucial concerns regarding safety, clinical efficacy, best setting, and cost-effectiveness remain to be addressed in further studies. In the future, mobile stroke units might allow the investigation of novel diagnostic (eg, biomarkers and automated imaging evaluation) and therapeutic (eg, neuroprotective drugs and treatments for haemorrhagic stroke) options in the prehospital setting, thus functioning as a tool for research on prehospital stroke management.

Read this open access article in PLoS One Journal


Mobility impairment is common in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) and there is a need to assess mobility in remote settings. Here, we apply a novel wireless, skin-mounted, and conformal inertial sensor (BioStampRC, MC10 Inc.) to examine gait characteristics of PwMS under controlled conditions. We determine the accuracy and precision of BioStampRC in measuring gait kinematics by comparing to contemporary research-grade measurement devices.


A total of 45 PwMS, who presented with diverse walking impairment (Mild MS = 15, Moderate MS = 15, Severe MS = 15), and 15 healthy control subjects participated in the study. Participants completed a series of clinical walking tests. During the tests participants were instrumented with BioStampRC and MTx (Xsens, Inc.) sensors on their shanks, as well as an activity monitor GT3X (Actigraph, Inc.) on their non-dominant hip. Shank angular velocity was simultaneously measured with the inertial sensors. Step number and temporal gait parameters were calculated from the data recorded by each sensor. Visual inspection and the MTx served as the reference standards for computing the step number and temporal parameters, respectively. Accuracy (error) and precision (variance of error) was assessed based on absolute and relative metrics. Temporal parameters were compared across groups using ANOVA.


Mean accuracy±precision for the BioStampRC was 2±2 steps error for step number, 6±9ms error for stride time and 6±7ms error for step time (0.6–2.6% relative error). Swing time had the least accuracy±precision (25±19ms error, 5±4% relative error) among the parameters. GT3X had the least accuracy±precision (8±14% relative error) in step number estimate among the devices. Both MTx and BioStampRC detected significantly distinct gait characteristics between PwMS with different disability levels (p<0.01).


BioStampRC sensors accurately and precisely measure gait parameters in PwMS across diverse walking impairment levels and detected differences in gait characteristics by disability level in PwMS. This technology has the potential to provide granular monitoring of gait both inside and outside the clinic.