Skip to main content
. 2015 Jun;21(7):845–853. doi: 10.1177/1352458515572406

Table 1.

Comparative Incidence and prevalence of NMO from recently published studies.

Country Diagnostic criteria Source of data No of cases/population at risk Ethnicity Crude incidence/100,000 Crude prevalence/100,000 F/M
French West Indies Cabre et al.,9 2007/2009 Wingerchuk 1999, 2006 Hospitals, clinics, neurologists, other specialists, registry, patient association 20/ 683,000 Afro-Caribbean Hispanic 0.19 (0.15–0.23) 2.53 All female
Cuba Cabrera Gomez et al.,10 2009 Wingerchuk 1999 Hospitals, clinics, other specialists, neurologists, clinical trial data, MS data base, media 11/11,177,743 Caucasian Afro-Caribbean 0.053 (0.04–0.07) 0.54 (0.39–0.69) 7.3:1
Denmark Asgari et al.,8 2011 Wingerchuk 2006 National Registry, Hospitals, MS-clinics, neurologists, other specialists, administrative databases 42/952,000 NMO=36, NMOSD=6 99% Caucasian 0.04 4 (3.1–5.7) 2.8:1
Wales Cossburn et al.,13 2012 Wingerchuk 2006 Hospital records, Neurologists, Regional database, Lab records 14/717,572 NMO=11, NMOSD=3 100% Caucasian 1.96 (1.22–2.97) 6:1
Japan Houzen et al.,14 2012 Wingerchuk 2006 Inpatient and outpatient records of MS-related institutions 3/352,353 Japanese NA 0.9 (0.2–2.5) All female
UK Jacob et al.,11 2013 Wingerchuk 2006 Hospital records, regional general hospital records, lab records 8/1,145,322 NMO=5 NMOSD=3 Caucasian 7 (88%) African 1(12%) 0.08 (0.03–0.16) 0.72 (0.3–0.16) 3.5:1
India Pandit et al.,15 2014 Wingerchuk 2006 Disease registry, inpatient and outpatient records of teaching hospitals and clinics, MRI centers 11/ 419,306 South Indians NA 2.6 1.2:1