Comparison of subcutaneous interferon beta-1a with glatiramer acetate in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (the REbif vs Glatiramer Acetate in Relapsing MS Disease [REGARD] study): a multicentre, randomised, parallel, open-label trial

Glatiramer Acetate 40 mg/mL in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Review

Glatiramer acetate (Copaxone(®)) is a synthetic analogue of myelin basic protein, which is thought to be involved in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis (MS). The therapeutic effects of the drug in the treatment of MS are thought to be via immunomodulation and neuroprotection. Subcutaneous glatiramer acetate 20 mg/mL once daily is approved in several countries for the treatment of relapsing forms of MS. Recently, a high-concentration formulation of glatiramer acetate 40 mg/mL administered three times weekly was approved in the USA and several European countries in the same indication. This article reviews the efficacy and tolerability of the high-concentration regimen. In the randomized, phase III GALA study in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), glatiramer acetate 40 mg/mL three times weekly reduced annualized relapse rates significantly more than placebo, and indirect comparisons indicate that the efficacy of the three-times-weekly regimen is similar to that of the 20 mg/mL once-daily regimen. Results of the randomized, phase IIIb GLACIER study in patients with RRMS demonstrated that the three-times-weekly regimen reduced the risk of injection-site reactions by 50 % and was associated with numerically greater patient convenience scores than the once-daily regimen. Thus, in the treatment of RRMS, glatiramer acetate 40 mg/mL three times weekly is effective and provides a better tolerated and possibly more convenient option than the once-daily regimen.

Disease-modifying therapy for multiple sclerosis

ABSTRACT 

Remarkable expansion of new diagnostic criteria and disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis has occurred in the last two decades. Revision of diagnostic criteria and characterization of disease course has allowed earlier diagnosis and better characterization of individual patients. With the current treatment armamentarium in the USA offering 11 agents, patients can now benefit from increasingly individualized therapy. The therapeutic decision-making process has become more complex, with the availability of multiple medications. Relative efficacy, potentially severe adverse events, tolerability issues and patient's preferences must now all be considered so that increasingly disease management more frequently involves physicians with multiple sclerosis subspecialty expertise. This article aims to provide a clinically oriented and concise review of currently available, as well as emerging, disease-modifying treatment therapies in multiple sclerosis.

Smoke and mirrors: Limited value of relative risk reductions for assessing the benefits of disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis

A reduction in relapse rate is the main primary outcome in most clinical trials in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), with the effect of a treatment commonly expressed as relative risk reduction for this outcome. Physicians often assume that a drug with a higher relative risk reduction demonstrated in one trial is more effective than a drug with a lower relative risk reduction in another, and may pass this idea on to younger physicians and to patients. The use of the relative risk reduction as a measure of drug efficacy can be misleading, as it depends on the nature of the population studied: a treatment effect characterized by a lower relative risk reduction may be more clinically meaningful than one with a higher relative risk reduction. This concept is especially important with regard to clinical trials in patients with MS, where relapse rates in placebo groups have been declining in recent decades. Direct, head-to-head comparisons are the only way to compare the efficacy of the different treatments for MS.

Unraveling the relationship between regional gray matter atrophy and pathology in connected white matter tracts in long-standing multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

Gray matter (GM) atrophy is common in multiple sclerosis (MS), but the relationship with white matter (WM) pathology is largely unknown. Some studies found a co-occurrence in specific systems, but a regional analysis across the brain in different clinical phenotypes is necessary to further understand the disease mechanism underlying GM atrophy in MS. Therefore, we investigated the association between regional GM atrophy and pathology in anatomically connected WM tracts.

METHODS

Conventional and diffusion tensor imaging was performed at 3T in 208 patients with long-standing MS and 60 healthy controls. Deep and cortical GM regions were segmented and quantified, and both lesion volumes and average normal appearing WM fractional anisotropy of their associated tracts were derived using an atlas obtained by probabilistic tractography in the controls. Linear regression was then performed to quantify the amount of regional GM atrophy that can be explained by WM pathology in the connected tract.

RESULTS

MS patients showed extensive deep and cortical GM atrophy. Cortical atrophy was particularly present in frontal and temporal regions. Pathology in connected WM tracts statistically explained both regional deep and cortical GM atrophy in relapsing-remitting (RR) patients, but only deep GM atrophy in secondary-progressive (SP) patients.

CONCLUSION

In RRMS patients, both deep and cortical GM atrophy were associated with pathology in connected WM tracts. In SPMS patients, only regional deep GM atrophy could be explained by pathology in connected WM tracts. This suggests that in SPMS patients cortical GM atrophy and WM damage are (at least partly) independent disease processes.

New management algorithms in multiple sclerosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Our current treatment algorithms include only IFN-β and glatiramer as available first-line disease-modifying drugs and natalizumab and fingolimod as second-line therapies. Today, 10 drugs have been approved in Europe and nine in the United States making the choice of therapy more complex. The purpose of the review has been to work out new management algorithms for treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis including new oral therapies and therapeutic monoclonal antibodies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent large placebo-controlled trials in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis have shown efficacy of new oral disease-modifying drugs, teriflunomide and dimethyl fumarate, with similar or better efficacy than the injectable disease-modifying drugs, IFN-β and glatiramer acetate. In addition, the new oral drugs seem to have a favorable safety profile. Further, the monoclonal antibody alemtuzumab, which in clinical trials has shown superiority to subcutaneous IFN-β 1a, has been approved in Europe, but not yet in the United States.

SUMMARY

In de novo-treated patients, the injectables, IFN-β and glatiramer acetate, will to a great extent be replaced by the new orals, dimethyl fumarate and teriflunomide. However, patients who are stable on an injectable with no or minor side-effects could continue their current therapy. Alemtuzumab should be used as a second-line therapy.

Comparative effectiveness of glatiramer acetate and interferon beta formulations in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis

Background:

The results of head-to-head comparisons of injectable immunomodulators (interferon β, glatiramer acetate) have been inconclusive and a comprehensive analysis of their effectiveness is needed.

Objective:

We aimed to compare, in a real-world setting, relapse and disability outcomes among patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) treated with injectable immunomodulators.

Methods:

Pairwise analysis of the international MSBase registry data was conducted using propensity-score matching. The four injectable immunomodulators were compared in six head-to-head analyses of relapse and disability outcomes using paired mixed models or frailty proportional hazards models adjusted for magnetic resonance imaging variables. Sensitivity and power analyses were conducted.

Results:

Of the 3326 included patients, 345–1199 patients per therapy were matched (median pairwise-censored follow-up was 3.7 years). Propensity matching eliminated >95% of the identified indication bias. Slightly lower relapse incidence was found among patients treated with glatiramer acetate or subcutaneous interferon β-1a relative to intramuscular interferon β-1a and interferon β-1b ( p≤0.001). No differences in 12-month confirmed progression of disability were observed.

Conclusion:

Small but statistically significant differences in relapse outcomes exist among the injectable immunomodulators. MSBase is sufficiently powered to identify these differences and reflects practice in tertiary MS centres. While the present study controlled indication, selection and attrition bias, centre-dependent variance in data quality was likely.

Increasing Use of Disease Modifying Drugs for MS in Canada

Background/Objectives:

The course of multiple sclerosis may be slowed by use of the disease modifying drugs (DMDs): subcutaneous or intramuscular interferon beta-1a, interferon beta-1b, glatiramer acetate, and natalizumab. We set out to compare utilization of these drugs in the Canadian provinces from 2002-2007.

Methods:

Using a retrospective cohort analysis, we reviewed population data from International Medical Statistics (IMS) Health between November 2001 and October 2007.

Results:

The total annual number of DMD prescriptions increased from 3.9, in 2002, to 5.1, in 2007, per 1,000 Canadians. The total annual cost of prescriptions rose from $187 million to $287 million. Of the four provinces responsible for the majority of prescriptions - Alberta, BC, Ontario, and Quebec - Quebec had the highest average annual prescription rate (7 per 1,000 population) and BC had the lowest rate (3.3 per 1,000 population). Subcutaneous interferon beta-1a was the most commonly used drug whereas glatiramer acetate showed the greatest growth in use from 2002 to 2007.

Conclusions:

Disease modifying drugs prescription rates and costs increased by more than 30% between 2002 and 2007. There was wide variation in DMD prescription rates and relative drug preferences across the provinces.

MRI measures of neuroprotection and repair in multiple sclerosis

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has had an enormous impact on multiple sclerosis, enabling early diagnosis and providing surrogate markers for monitoring treatment response in clinical trials. Despite these advantages, conventional MRI is limited by lack of pathological specificity and lack of sensitivity to grey matter lesions and to microscopic damage in normal appearing tissue. Quantitative MRI techniques such as measures of parenchymal volume loss, magnetisation transfer imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, and proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy have enhanced our understanding of the nature and mechanism of tissue injury and repair in multiple sclerosis, and provided more specific correlates of neurological deficits and disability accrual. Some of these techniques may be of potential use in clinical trials as surrogate outcome measures for measuring treatment effects on neurodegenerative injury, which is currently difficult to quantify in clinical trials. In this respect, measures of brain volume, T1 hypointensity and magnetisation transfer ratio, and optical coherence tomography appear to be the most promising in the short term. The evidence for a role of neurodegeneration in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis, and particularly in the accumulation of irreversible disability, has become increasingly strong over recent years. This has prompted the search for new treatments that can effectively slow down, halt or even reverse such neurodegenerative processes, and in this way restore nervous system function. For this reason, there has been much interest in the development and validation of surrogate markers of neurodegeneration and neuroprotection for use in clinical trials. Advances in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technology have allowed the development and implementation of a number of methods that may be promising in this respect. To assess the utility of these methods and to identify needs for further research, sixty experts in neuropathology, clinical measurement, imaging and statistics participated in a meeting held in Amsterdam in 2008 under the aegis of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. In the proceedings of the meeting, published in 2009 [1], brain volume changes, T1 hypointensity, magnetisation transfer ratio and optical coherence tomography were deemed the most promising measures for screening the neuroprotective capacity of new agents. Other MRI techniques, such as DTI, (1)H-MRS and functional MRI, although potentially useful, require more observational data to help determine the optimal trial design. This article will review some of the issues that were discussed at this meeting, and present some of the imaging techniques that were considered to be the most promising.

Review of methodological issues of clinical trials in multiple sclerosis

There are currently six approved disease-modifying therapies available to the physician for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Their efficacy on clinical and radiological parameters has been demonstrated in Phase III pivotal clinical trials over the past two decades. Perceptions of the relative potency of these treatments have been driven principally by the response measured relative to a placebo group. However, efficacy comparisons between trials is of limited value because of differences in study methodology, in characteristics of the patient populations included, in the behaviour of the placebo group during the trial and in the time at which the trial was conducted. Moreover, and most importantly, the assumption that the efficacy observed in clinical trial settings is the same as that achievable in everyday clinical practice is inevitably flawed. Impressions of the relative efficacy of two treatments may differ dramatically depending on whether absolute or relative differences with respect to placebo are compared. Randomised direct comparative trials are therefore the only objective way to evaluate the relative efficacy of two therapies. It is clear that between-treatment differences are difficult to quantify in short-term studies and require large numbers of patients. Long-term outcome is increasingly important to monitor in spite of the inherent methodological limitations in order to establish the safety profile of a potentially lifelong treatment. New disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis will soon be available. Although these are eagerly awaited, their risk-benefit profile, and their place in therapy, will only be adequately understood once real-life and long-term use has been documented as well as it has been for current treatments. Over the last two decades, considerable advances have been made in the methodology of clinical trials in multiple sclerosis. Consensual standardised protocols have been designed and validated for Phase II and Phase III trials, with standardised definitions for short-term clinical and radiological outcome measures. The elaboration and implementation of this methodology were possible through international collaborations, and this has enabled extensive experience to be gained throughout the world. These trials have laid the foundation for an evidence-based medicine approach to the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Clinical trials in multiple sclerosis have to some extent become a victim of their own success, with more and more trials competing for a limited pool of patients and limited resources. Modern trials require large number of patients to generate adequate statistical power and this in turn entails recruitment in many countries across different continents. This increases the complexity and cost of the study, and contract research organisations now play a dominant role in the logistics and administration of these trials. The challenge in conducting trials on a global basis involving large numbers of countries is to ensure that this heterogeneity does not impinge on the reliability of the findings. This may happen due to differences in the patient populations included in different countries, access to or experience with methods in evaluation, for example certain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols, and also due to ethical considerations. In addition, whether disease-modifying treatments are reimbursed in a given country or not will influence what sort of patients are likely to get included in clinical trial protocols.

Multiple sclerosis: overview of disease-modifying agents

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune disease that usually affects young adults, causing progressive physical and cognitive disability. Since the 1990s, its treatment has been based on parenteral medications known collectively as immunomodulators. This drug class is considered safe and usually prevents 30% of MS relapses. Drugs in this class exert almost the same efficacy and require an inconvenient administration route. New medications have recently been launched worldwide. Thus, new oral drugs are increasingly being administered to MS patients and contributing to a better quality of life, since these have better efficacy than the old immunomodulators. Today, 10 different drugs for MS are marketed worldwide, which requires deep knowledge among neurologists and other healthcare professionals. This paper summarizes all the drugs approved for MS in the US and Europe, emphasizing their mechanism of action, the results from phase II and III studies, and the product safety.

Treatment Optimization in MS: Canadian MS Working Group Updated Recommendations

The Canadian Multiple Sclerosis Working Group (CMSWG) developed practical recommendations in 2004 to assist clinicians in optimizing the use of disease-modifying therapies (DMT) in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. The CMSWG convened to review how disease activity is assessed, propose a more current approach for assessing suboptimal response, and to suggest a scheme for switching or escalating treatment. Practical criteria for relapses, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) progression and MRI were developed to classify the clinical level of concern as Low, Medium and High. The group concluded that a change in treatment may be considered in any RRMS patient if there is a high level of concern in any one domain (relapses, progression or MRI), a medium level of concern in any two domains, or a low level of concern in all three domains. These recommendations for assessing treatment response should assist clinicians in making more rational choices in their management of relapsing MS patients.

Multiple Sclerosis Disease-Modifying Therapy Prescribing Patterns in Ontario

Background:

Differences in Multiple sclerosis (MS) disease-modifying therapy (DMT) prescribing patterns between different groups of neurologists have not been explored.

Objective:

To examine concentrations of prescribing patterns and to assess if MS-specialists use a broader range of DMTs relative to general neurologists.

Methods:

We conducted a cross-sectional study using administrative claims databases in Ontario, Canada to link neurologists to 2009 DMT prescription data. MS specialization was defined using both practice location and prescription patterns. Lorenz curves and Gini coefficients were constructed to examine prescribing patterns, separating neurologist characteristics dichotomously and separating Avonex from the other standard DMTs (Betaseron, Rebif and Copaxone). Gini coefficient 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived using jack-knife statistical techniques.

Results:

Prescriptions were highly concentrated with 12% of Ontario neurologists prescribing 80% of DMTs. There was a trend towards Avonex being more commonly prescribed relative to the other DMTs. When MS specialization was defined by DMT prescribing, high-volume prescribing neurologists showed a broader range of DMT prescribing (Gini 0.38-0.44) in comparison to low-volume prescribers (Gini 0.57-0.66).

Conclusions:

The majority of DMTs are prescribed by a small subset of neurologists. High-volume prescribing MS-specialists show more variability in DMT use while low-volume prescribers tend to individually focus on a narrower range of DMTs.

Utility of the Canadian Treatment Optimization Recommendations (TOR) in MS Care

Objectives:

Criteria for Treatment Optimization Recommendations (TOR) for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) identify suboptimal response to disease-modifying treatment (DMT). The Canadian TOR (CanTOR) were used to indicate recommendations for treatment switches or treatment maintenance based on relapse, disease progression and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) criteria in patients. We assessed concordance between the TOR and clinicians' decisions regarding treatment response and identified prevalence of patients with MS receiving DMT meeting medium/high levels of concern according to TOR.

Methods:

Prospective baseline and end-of-study assessments of patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) or clinically isolated syndrome were conducted in this open-label, 12-month, Phase IV, observational Canadian study.

Results:

Data were reported for 184 patients (female 72%, mean age 39 years) of which 96% had RRMS. The TOR criteria identified 19 (10.3%) patients with suboptimal response to treatment. Twelve patients had ≥1 high level of concern. Two patients had ≥2 medium levels of concern. Concordance between TOR and clinician decision in maintaining treatment was 95.3%. Where treatment change was recommended by the TOR, concordance was 29.4%. Clinicians identified the TOR as the principal reason for changing treatment in 50.0% of cases where the TOR identified suboptimal response. The TOR were considered useful by 70.6% of clinicians when treatment optimization was recommended and by 55.3% when maintaining treatment was recommended.

Conclusions:

The TOR criteria can identify suboptimal response in this patient cohort. Concordance between TOR and clinician decision was high when maintaining treatment was recommended. Usefulness of the TOR was most apparent when treatment optimization was recommended.

Update on disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review is to discuss the selection and use of disease- modifying treatments for patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS).

METHODS

PubMed was searched (1966-2014) using the terms multiple sclerosis, treatment, interferon, glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, fingolimod, teriflunomide, natalizumab, rituximab, and alemtuzumab.

FINDINGS

MS is a chronic neurological disorder that can cause a substantial degree of disability. Because of its usual onset in young adults, patients may require treatment for several decades. Currently available agents include platform injectable therapies, newer oral agents, and second-line monoclonal antibody treatments. Treatment decisions have become more complex with the introduction of new approaches, and a major goal is to balance perceived efficacy and tolerability in a specific patient with the relative impact of disease activity and adverse events on quality of life. Here the options for disease-modifying treatments for relapsing forms of MS are reviewed, and current and future challenges are discussed.

IMPLICATIONS

An evidence-based approach can be used for the selection of disease-modifying treatments based on disease phenotype and severity, adverse events, and perceived efficacy.

Alemtuzumab for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a review of its clinical pharmacology, efficacy and safety

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory condition of the CNS presumably induced by an environmental trigger(s) in a genetically susceptible individual. Inflammation is prominent and most susceptible to intervention early in MS, so early treatment with disease-modifying therapies is recommended to reduce relapses and new MRI activity (both markers of inflammation) with the goal of delaying disability progression. Unfortunately, the response to the disease-modifying therapies is variable and often falls short of stopping observable disease activity, so the search for more effective agents continues. Alemtuzumab is a monoclonal antibody against CD52 that has exhibited significant efficacy throughout its clinical trial program in MS; uniquely, some of the studies have demonstrated a sustained reduction in disability in MS patients. Countering this impressive efficacy is an associated high risk of autoimmune events (especially thyroid) and concerns for infection or malignancy given prolonged immunosuppression after treatment with alemtuzumab.

Interferons-beta versus glatiramer acetate for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Interferons (IFNs)-beta and glatiramer acetate (GA) were the first two disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) approved 15 years ago for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). DMTs prescription rates as first or switching therapies and their costs have increased substantially over the past decade. As more DMTs become available, the choice of a specific DMT should reflect the risk/benefit profile, as well as the impact on quality profile. As MS cohorts enrolled in different studies can vary significantly, head-to-head trials are considered the best approach for gaining objective reliable data when two different drugs are compared. The purpose of this study is to summarise available evidence on the comparative effectiveness of IFNs-beta and GA on disease course through a systematic review of head-to-head trials.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether IFNs-beta and GA differ in terms of safety and efficacy in the treatment of patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Trials Specialised Register of the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Group (29 October 2013) and the reference lists of retrieved articles. We contacted trialists and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing directly IFNs-beta versus GA in study participants affected by RRMS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Five trials contributed to this review. A total of 2858 participants were randomly assigned to IFNs (1679) and GA (1179). The treatment duration was three years for one study and two years for the other four RCTs. The IFNs analysed in comparison with GA were IFN-beta 1b 250 mcg (two trials, 933 participants), IFN-beta 1a 44 mcg (two trials, 441 participants) and IFN-beta 1a 30 mcg (two trials, 305 participants). Enrolled participants were affected by active RRMS. All studies were at high risk for attrition bias.Both therapies showed similar clinical efficacy at 24 months, given the primary outcome variables (number of participants with relapse (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.24) or progression (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.35)). However at 36 months, evidence from a single study suggests that relapse rates were higher in the group given IFNs than in the GA group (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.7, P value 0.002).Secondary magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes analysis showed that effects on new or enlarging T2- or gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing lesions at 24 months were similar (mean difference (MD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.26, and MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.02, respectively). However, the reduction in T2- and T1-weighted lesion volume was significantly greater in the groups given IFNs than in the GA groups (MD -0.58, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.18, P value 0.004, and MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.33 to -0.07, P value 0.003, respectively).The number of participants who dropped out of the study because of adverse events was similar in the two groups (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.40).The quality of evidence for primary outcomes was judged as moderate for clinical end points, but for safety and some MRI outcomes (number of active T2 lesions), quality was judged as low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of IFNs-beta and GA in the treatment of patients with RRMS, including clinical (e.g. patients with relapse, risk to progression) and MRI (Gd-enhancing lesions) activity measures, seem to be similar or to show only small differences. When MRI lesion load accrual is considered, the effect of the two treatments differs, in that IFNs-beta were found to limit the increase in lesion burden as compared with GA. Evidence was insufficient for a comparison of the effects of the two treatments on patient-reported outcomes, such as quality of life measures.

Disease Modifying Therapy in Multiple Sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis is an autoimmune disease of the central nervous system characterized by inflammatory demyelination and axonal degeneration. It is the commonest cause of permanent disability in young adults. Environmental and genetic factors have been suggested in its etiology. Currently available disease modifying drugs are only effective in controlling inflammation but not prevention of neurodegeneration or accumulation of disability. Search for an effective neuroprotective therapy is at the forefront of multiple sclerosis research.

Therapeutic approaches to disease modifying therapy for multiple sclerosis in adults: an Australian and New Zealand perspective: part 1 historical and established therapies. MS Neurology Group of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Neurologists

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a potentially life-changing immune mediated disease of the central nervous system. Until recently, treatment has been largely confined to acute treatment of relapses, symptomatic therapies and rehabilitation. Through persistent efforts of dedicated physicians and scientists around the globe for 160 years, a number of therapies that have an impact on the long term outcome of the disease have emerged over the past 20 years. In this three part series we review the practicalities, benefits and potential hazards of each of the currently available and emerging treatment options for MS. We pay particular attention to ways of abrogating the risks of these therapies and provide advice on the most appropriate indications for using individual therapies. In Part 1 we review the history of the development of MS therapies and its connection with the underlying immunobiology of the disease. The established therapies for MS are reviewed in detail and their current availability and indications in Australia and New Zealand are summarised. We examine the evidence to support their use in the treatment of MS.

Dimethyl fumarate (BG-12) for the treatment of multiple sclerosis

Treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS) are only partially effective and most require a parenteral route of administration and/or may have severe side effects. Dimethyl fumarate is the active compound of BG-12 recently licensed for the treatment of relapsing-remitting MS. The pivotal Phase III trials have demonstrated an approximately 50% reduction of relapse rates compared with placebo paralleled by a reduction in new lesion formation on MRI. A dose of 240 mg two-times a day had an optimal effect. Flushing and gastrointestinal symptoms (diarrhea, abdominal pain, nausea) were common adverse events in the first month(s) of treatment. Severe side effects were not more common than in the placebo group for a treatment period of 2 years. The mode of action is not exactly clear and both immunomodulatory effects and an activation of the transcription factor Nrf2 are suggested. This new oral drug will be a welcome addition to existing MS treatments.

A changing treatment landscape for multiple sclerosis: challenges and opportunities

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is primarily an autoimmune disease of the central nervous system, but also encompasses prominent neurodegenerative aspects. A significant proportion of MS patients will develop neurological disability over time and up until recently treatment options have been limited. However, MS treatment is now at a stage of rapid progress, with several new drugs that have reached the market or will be launched in the near future. This provides new opportunities for individualized treatment, but also creates new challenges regarding monitoring of disease activity, long-term safety issues and efficacy, not least in patients with progressive disease.

Efficacy and safety of BG-12 (dimethyl fumarate) and other disease-modifying therapies for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and mixed treatment comparison

OBJECTIVE

Currently, direct comparative evidence or head-to-head data between BG-12 (dimethyl fumarate) and other disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) is limited. This study is a systematic review and data synthesis of published randomized clinical trials comparing the efficacy and safety of existing DMTs to BG-12 for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for English-language publications from 1 January 1960 to 15 November 2012. Clinicaltrials.gov, metaRegister of Controlled Trials, and conference proceedings from relevant annual symposia were also hand searched. Two independent reviewers collected and extracted data, with discrepancies reconciled by a third reviewer. Included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of DMTs (interferon [IFN] beta-1a, IFN beta-1b, glatiramer acetate [GA], BG-12, fingolimod, natalizumab, and teriflunomide) in adults with RRMS. Mixed treatment comparisons were conducted to derive the relative effect size for the included treatments. Annualized relapse rate (ARR), disability progression, and safety outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

BG-12 240 mg twice a day (BID) significantly reduces ARR compared to placebo (rate ratio: 0.529 [95% CI: 0.451-0.620]), IFNs (0.76 [95% CI: 0.639-0.904]), GA (0.795 [95% CI: 0.668-0.947]), and teriflunomide 7 mg and 14 mg (0.769 [95% CI: 0.610-0.970] and 0.775 [95% CI: 0.614-0.979]), and does not show a significant difference when compared to fingolimod. Only natalizumab was significantly superior to BG-12 in reducing ARR. BG-12 also demonstrated favorable results for disability and safety outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Based on indirect comparison, BG-12 offers an effective oral treatment option for patients with RRMS with an overall promising efficacy and safety profile compared to currently approved DMTs. Key limitations of the systematic review were the large heterogeneity in patients enrolled and the variability in the definition of outcomes in included trials.

Changes in mipomersen dosing regimen provide similar exposure with improved tolerability in randomized placebo-controlled study of healthy volunteers

Background

Mipomersen, an apolipoprotein B synthesis inhibitor, demonstrated significant reductions in low‐density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, non‐high density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B in 4 phase 3 studies at the FDA‐approved subcutaneous dose of 200 mg once weekly.

Methods and Results

A short‐term phase 1 study in healthy volunteers was conducted to evaluate the relative bioavailability, safety, and tolerability of mipomersen in 2 test dose regimens in reference to the 200 mg weekly dose regimen. Eighty‐four adults were randomized to 1 of 3 cohorts (30 mg once daily, 70 mg 3 times weekly, or 200 mg once weekly) and then mipomersen or placebo (3:1 ratio) for 3 weeks of treatment. Comparable mipomersen post‐distribution phase plasma concentrations were observed across the 3 dose regimens suggesting similar tissue exposure. Injection site reactions were reported, but did not lead to treatment discontinuation. The median incidence of these responses per injection was decreased by lowering the dose. Signals from a diverse panel of systemic inflammation markers were essentially indistinguishable between dose regimens and placebo treatment. The one exception was a modest transient post‐dose elevation of C‐reactive protein (CRP) in the mipomersen 200 mg weekly group. This elevation was not associated with an increase in other proinflammatory markers.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated a similar drug exposure and overall safety profile between the 3 dosing regimens. Exploratory assessment of a diverse panel of biomarkers found no indication of a systemic inflammatory response to mipomersen treatment. These results support assessment of alternative dose regimens in longer‐term studies.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01061814.

Evaluating the response to glatiramer acetate in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients

BACKGROUND

In patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), a scoring system based on new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) active lesions, relapses and sustained disability progression after a 1-year treatment with IFNβ predicted patient disability progression over time; however, this score had not been tested in patients receiving glatiramer acetate (GA).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate whether this previous scoring system can also be applied to patients treated with GA.

METHODS

This was a prospective, longitudinal study of 151 RRMS patients treated with GA. Their scores were constructed, based on the clinical and MRI activity after 1 year of therapy. Regression analysis was performed, in order to identify the response variables.

RESULTS

The total possible score range was 0-3. Patients with a score of ≥ 2 and those with clinical activity (with or without MRI activity) during their first year of treatment were at increased risk of continuing with relapses and/or sustained disability in the next 2 years (odds ratio (OR): 38.8; p < 0.0001 and OR: 7.8; p < 0.009, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In RRMS patients treated with GA, a combination of clinical activity measures may have prognostic value for identifying patients with disease activity in the next 2 years of therapy.

Relapse rates in patients with multiple sclerosis switching from interferon to fingolimod or glatiramer acetate: a US claims database study

BACKGROUND

Approximately one-third of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) are unresponsive to, or intolerant of, interferon (IFN) therapy, prompting a switch to other disease-modifying therapies. Clinical outcomes of switching therapy are unknown. This retrospective study assessed differences in relapse rates among patients with MS switching from IFN to fingolimod or glatiramer acetate (GA) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

US administrative claims data from the PharMetrics Plus™ database were used to identify patients with MS who switched from IFN to fingolimod or GA between October 1, 2010 and March 31, 2012. Patients were matched 1∶1 using propensity scores within strata (number of pre-index relapses) on demographic (e.g. age and gender) and disease (e.g. timing of pre-index relapse, comorbidities and symptoms) characteristics. A claims-based algorithm was used to identify relapses while patients were persistent with therapy over 360 days post-switch. Differences in both the probability of experiencing a relapse and the annualized relapse rate (ARR) while persistent with therapy were assessed.

RESULTS

The matched sample population contained 264 patients (n = 132 in each cohort). Before switching, 33.3% of patients in both cohorts had experienced at least one relapse. During the post-index persistence period, the proportion of patients with at least one relapse was lower in the fingolimod cohort (12.9%) than in the GA cohort (25.0%), and ARRs were lower with fingolimod (0.19) than with GA (0.51). Patients treated with fingolimod had a 59% lower probability of relapse (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-0.80; p = 0.0091) and 62% fewer relapses per year (rate ratio, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.21-0.68; p = 0.0013) compared with those treated with GA.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world setting, patients with MS who switched from IFNs to fingolimod were significantly less likely to experience relapses than those who switched to GA.

Fingolimod for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis

Fingolimod 0.5 mg (Gilenya(™), Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, FL, USA) is the first once-daily oral therapy approved for relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS) in the USA and for rapidly evolving severe MS or highly active disease despite IFN-β treatment in Europe. An extensive clinical development program has established fingolimod as an effective therapy that reduces relapses by approximately half compared with placebo or intramuscular IFN-β1a. Over 2 years of postmarketing experience in >63,000 MS patients (with >73,000 patient-years of exposure) across the world has contributed to a well-characterized safety profile for fingolimod, and its side effects are manageable through patient monitoring. This article discusses the unique mechanisms of action of fingolimod in the immune and nervous systems, the key data underlying its efficacy and safety profile and perspectives on the role of fingolimod in current and future treatment strategies for MS.

Treatment effect on brain atrophy correlates with treatment effect on disability in multiple sclerosis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the extent to which treatment effect on brain atrophy is able to mediate, at the trial level, the treatment effect on disability progression in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

METHODS

We collected all published randomized clinical trials in RRMS lasting at least 2 years and including as endpoints disability progression (defined as 6 or 3 months confirmed 1-point increase on the Expanded Disability Status Scale), active magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions (defined as new/enlarging T2 lesions), and brain atrophy (defined as change in brain volume between month 24 and month 6-12). Treatment effects were expressed as relative reductions. A linear regression, weighted for trial size and duration, was used to assess the relationship between the treatment effects on MRI markers and on disability progression.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials including >13,500 RRMS patients were included in the meta-analysis. Treatment effects on disability progression were correlated with treatment effects both on brain atrophy (R(2)  = 0.48, p = 0.001) and on active MRI lesions (R(2)  = 0.61, p < 0.001). When the effects on both MRI endpoints were included in a multivariate model, the correlation was higher (R(2)  = 0.75, p < 0.001), and both variables were retained as independently related to the treatment effect on disability progression.

INTERPRETATION

In RRMS, the treatment effect on brain atrophy is correlated with the effect on disability progression over 2 years. This effect is independent of the effect of active MRI lesions on disability; the 2 MRI measures predict the treatment effect on disability more closely when used in combination.

Two decades of subcutaneous glatiramer acetate injection: current role of the standard dose, and new high-dose low-frequency glatiramer acetate in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis treatment

Glatiramer acetate, a synthetic amino acid polymer analog of myelin basic protein, is one of the first approved drugs for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Several clinical trials have shown consistent and sustained efficacy of glatiramer acetate 20 mg subcutaneously daily in reducing relapses and new demyelinating lesions on magnetic resonance imaging in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, as well as comparable efficacy to high-dose interferon beta. Some preclinical and clinical data suggest a neuroprotective role for glatiramer acetate in multiple sclerosis. Glatiramer acetate is associated with a relatively favorable side-effect profile, and importantly this was confirmed also during long-term use. Glatiramer acetate is the only multiple sclerosis treatment compound that has gained the US Food and Drug Administration pregnancy category B. All these data support its current use as a first-line treatment option for patients with clinical isolated syndrome or relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. More recent data have shown that high-dose glatiramer acetate (ie, 40 mg) given three times weekly is effective, safe, and well tolerated in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, prompting the approval of this dosage in the US in early 2014. This high-dose, lower-frequency glatiramer acetate might represent a new, more convenient regimen of administration, and this might enhance patients' adherence to the treatment, crucial for optimal disease control.

Enhanced patient support services improve patient persistence with multiple sclerosis treatment

BACKGROUND

Subcutaneous interferon beta-1a (sc IFN β-1a) therapy (44 µg or 22 µg, three times weekly) improves relapse rates and disability progression in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS). While early treatment with disease-modifying drugs may maximize therapeutic benefit, patients with low adherence or long treatment gaps are at increased risk of relapse. MySupport is an industry-sponsored program that provides support to patients with MS who have been prescribed sc IFN β-1a in the UK or Republic of Ireland (ROI), via telephone and text messaging, website access, and (in some cases) face-to-face support from a dedicated MySupport Nurse. The aim of this audit was to assess if the MySupport program in the ROI could improve persistence to sc IFN β-1a therapy.

METHODS

Anonymized data were supplied retrospectively from the MySupport program, for ROI patients who were registered in January 2010 to receive sc IFN β-1a three times weekly. Patients were recorded as "new" at their first drug delivery; "active", if they continued to receive scheduled deliveries; "interrupted", if their medication delivery was halted; or "stopped", if no deliveries were made for 12 months. The number of "active" patients was recorded monthly for 24 months. Results were compared with data from UK patients with MS, who were receiving National Health Service (NHS) support only, or this support plus MySupport.

RESULTS

A greater proportion of ROI patients receiving MySupport (compared against UK patients receiving NHS support only) were on treatment at 12 months (87.8% versus 79.3%) and at 24 months (76.2% versus 61.8%). The odds of being on treatment were significantly greater, at all time points, for ROI patients receiving MySupport, versus UK patients receiving NHS support only (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

A personalized support program, utilizing one-to-one nursing support and additional support materials, can increase the probability of patients with MS remaining on disease-modifying drug treatment.

Immunological mechanism of action and clinical profile of disease-modifying treatments in multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a life-long, potentially debilitating disease of the central nervous system (CNS). MS is considered to be an immune-mediated disease, and the presence of autoreactive peripheral lymphocytes in CNS compartments is believed to be critical in the process of demyelination and tissue damage in MS. Although MS is not currently a curable disease, several disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are now available, or are in development. These DMTs are all thought to primarily suppress autoimmune activity within the CNS. Each therapy has its own mechanism of action (MoA) and, as a consequence, each has a different efficacy and safety profile. Neurologists can now select therapies on a more individual, patient-tailored basis, with the aim of maximizing potential for long-term efficacy without interruptions in treatment. The MoA and clinical profile of MS therapies are important considerations when making that choice or when switching therapies due to suboptimal disease response. This article therefore reviews the known and putative immunological MoAs alongside a summary of the clinical profile of therapies approved for relapsing forms of MS, and those in late-stage development, based on published data from pivotal randomized, controlled trials.

Disease-modifying agents in multiple sclerosis

Over the past two decades, major advances have been made in the development of disease-modifying agents (DMAs) for multiple sclerosis (MS), and nine agents are now licensed for use in the treatment of MS in the United States. Clinical trials have demonstrated that a number of investigational agents have beneficial effects on clinical and radiographic measures of disease activity, thus the repertoire of available DMAs in MS will likely continue to expand moving forward. Although many of the first-line DMAs have the benefits of established long-term safety and tolerability, in some patients, treatment with one of the more potent novel agents may be appropriate. However, the use of novel agents must be approached with caution, since short-term clinical trials give little information on the long-term efficacy and safety of novel DMAs in MS patients. This chapter will consider the efficacy and safety of both established and investigational agents for the treatment of MS.

Novel therapeutic options for multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is considered as an autoimmune disorder of the CNS with neuro-inflammatory and neurodegenerative components. We review here the innovative drugs recently registered and those in clinical development for MS. Immunomodulation has been the preferred therapeutic approach for MS since the first IFN-β was registered in the 1990s. Several immunomodulators are now available, which show a high efficacy in reducing the number of relapses in patients with the relapsing-remitting form of MS (RRMS). The high efficacy of most immunomodulators is, however, associated with substantial safety risks, notably concerning infections or cancers. Recently oral drugs have been approved for RRMS; however, biologics, and notably, monoclonal antibodies are still well represented in the development pipelines. An unmet medical need remains the treatment of the primary and secondary forms of MS or chronic progressive MS (CPMS). Half a dozen immunomodulators with proven efficacy in RRMS are now undergoing evaluation in Phase III trials in the CPMS indication. Neuroprotective drugs that prevent demyelination and/or improve remyelination would be interesting for CPMS, but these drugs are currently in the early development phase and their efficacy has not been demonstrated yet.

The outlook for alemtuzumab in multiple sclerosis

Alemtuzumab is a humanized anti-CD52 monoclonal antibody. Treatment in humans results in a rapid, profound, and prolonged B- and T-cell lymphopenia. Subsequently, lymphocyte reconstitution by homeostatic mechanisms alters the composition, phenotype, and function of T-cell subsets, thus allowing the immune system to be 'reset'. One phase II and two phase III randomized, multicenter, single-blinded (outcomes assessor) clinical trials of alemtuzumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis have now been completed. Against an active comparator and the current first-line therapy for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (interferon-beta), alemtuzumab showed a significant reduction in annualized relapse rate as well as a significant reduction in the accumulation of disability. These outcomes are sustained over at least 5 years following treatment. The most common adverse effects are mild infusion reactions, an increased incidence of mild-to-moderate severity infections and secondary autoimmunity. The latter is observed in a third of treated patients, commonly thyroid disease but other target cells have been described including cytopenias. Marketing authorization applications have been submitted for the use of alemtuzumab in multiple sclerosis to the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, with licensing expected in 2013. Here, we discuss the outlook for alemtuzumab in multiple sclerosis in light of the currently available therapies, outcomes of and lessons learnt from clinical trials, and the overall position of monoclonal antibodies in modern treatment strategies.

Relating relapse and T2 lesion changes to disability progression in multiple sclerosis: a systematic literature review and regression analysis

Background

In the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS), the most important therapeutic aim of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) is to prevent or postpone long-term disability. Given the typically slow progression observed in the majority of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) patients, the primary endpoint for most randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is a reduction in relapse rate. It is widely assumed that reducing relapse rate will slow disability progression. Similarly, MRI studies suggest that reducing T2 lesions will be associated with slowing long-term disability in MS. The objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between treatment effects on relapse rates and active T2 lesions to differences in disease progression (as measured by the Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS]) in trials evaluating patients with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), RRMS, and secondary progressive MS (SPMS).

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO to identify randomized trials published in English from January 1, 1993-June 3, 2013 evaluating DMTs in adult MS patients using keywords for CIS, RRMS, and SPMS combined with keywords for relapse and recurrence. Eligible studies were required to report outcomes of relapse and T2 lesion changes or disease progression in CIS, RRMS, or SPMS patients receiving DMTs and have a follow-up duration of at least 22 months. Ultimately, 40 studies satisfied these criteria for inclusion. Regression analyses were conducted on RCTs to relate differences between the effect of treatments on relapse rates and on active T2 lesions to differences between the effects of treatments on disease progression (as measured by EDSS).

Results

Regression analysis determined there is a substantive clinically and statistically significant association between concurrent treatment effects in relapse rate and EDSS; p < 0.01. Lower treatment effects were associated with higher relative rates of disease progression. Significant associations between T2 lesion measures and EDSS measures also were found (p < 0.05), with some suggestion that the strength of the association may differ for older versus newer DMTs.

Conclusions

Treatment differences in relapse reduction and T2 lesions are positively related to differences in disease progression over the first two years of treatment.

Multiple sclerosis research: diagnostics, disease-modifying treatments, and emerging therapies

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a complex disease that affects the central nervous system. It is believed to be an immune mediated disease, and although the etiology remains unknown, it is believed to occur from a combination of genetic risk factors and environmental risk factors. There is no single diagnostic test for MS, and diagnostic criteria have been developed to aid the provider in making an accurate and timely diagnosis. Once a diagnosis of MS is made, treatments directed toward the inflammatory immune response should be initiated. Currently, there are 10 treatments for MS: four interferon beta products; one glatiramer acetate; one monoclonal antibody--natalizumab; three oral treatments--fingolimod, teriflunomide, and dimethyl fumarate; and one immunosuppressant agent--mitoxantrone. Each of these agents has a different administration and different risks and side effects. Numerous agents are in late stage development, and it is possible that several more agents, all with different mechanisms of action, will become available over the next several years.

Glatiramer acetate: a review of its use in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and in delaying the onset of clinically definite multiple sclerosis

Glatiramer acetate (Copaxone(®)) is a synthetic analogue of the multiple sclerosis (MS)-associated antigen, myelin basic protein. Although its exact mechanisms of action in MS remain to be fully elucidated, the key mechanisms of action of glatiramer acetate appear to be modulation of the inflammatory response and neuroprotective and/or neuroregenerative effects. Subcutaneous glatiramer acetate is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) and the treatment of patients who have experienced a well-defined first clinical episode and have magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features consistent with MS or have been determined to be at high risk of developing clinically definite MS (CDMS). In clinical trials in patients with RRMS, glatiramer acetate reduced the frequency of relapses and reduced the burden and activity of disease on MRI, was more effective than placebo and showed generally similar efficacy to subcutaneous interferon (IFN) β-1a and IFNβ-1b. Furthermore, the beneficial effects of glatiramer acetate were sustained during up to 15 years of treatment in an extension study. In patients with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), glatiramer acetate significantly delayed the onset of CDMS compared with placebo. The drug was generally well tolerated in these patient populations, with injection-site reactions being the most commonly occurring adverse events. Therefore, glatiramer acetate remains a valuable first-line option in the treatment of RRMS and is an option for delaying the onset of CDMS in patients with CIS.

Glatiramer acetate attenuates the pro-migratory profile of adhesion molecules on various immune cell subsets in multiple sclerosis

An altered expression pattern of adhesion molecules (AM) on the surface of immune cells is a premise for their extravasation into the central nervous system (CNS) and the formation of acute brain lesions in multiple sclerosis (MS). We evaluated the impact of glatiramer acetate (GA) on cell-bound and soluble AM in the peripheral blood of patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). Fifteen patients treated de novo with GA were studied on four occasions over a period of 12 months. Surface levels of intracellular cell adhesion molecule (ICAM)-1, ICAM-3, lymphocyte function-associated antigen (LFA)-1 and very late activation antigen (VLA)-4 were assessed in T cells (CD3(+) CD8(+) , CD3(+) CD4(+) ), B cells, natural killer (NK) cells, natural killer T cells (NK T) and monocytes by five-colour flow cytometry. Soluble E-selectin, ICAM-1, ICAM-3, platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule (PECAM)-1, P-selectin and vascular cell adhesion molecule (VCAM)-1 were determined with a fluorescent bead-based immunoassay. The pro-migratory pattern in RRMS was verified by comparison with healthy controls and was characterized by up-regulation of LFA-1 (CD3(+) CD4(+) T cells, B cells), VLA-4 (CD3(+) CD8(+) T cells, NK cells), ICAM-1 (B cells) and ICAM-3 (NK cells). Effects of GA treatment were most pronounced after 6 months and included attenuated levels of LFA-1 (CD3(+) CD4(+) ) and VLA-4 (CD3(+) CD4(+) , CD3(+) CD8(+) , NK, NK T, monocytes). Further effects included lowering of ICAM-1 and ICAM-3 levels in almost all immune cell subsets. Soluble AM levels in RRMS did not differ from healthy controls and remained unaltered after GA treatment. The deregulated pro-migratory expression profile of cell-bound AM is altered by GA treatment. While this alteration may contribute to the beneficial action of the drug, the protracted development and unselective changes indicate more secondary immune regulatory phenomena related to these effects.