Oral teriflunomide for patients with a first clinical episode suggestive of multiple sclerosis (TOPIC): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Evolving concepts in the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis

In the past 20 years the treatment scenario of multiple sclerosis has radically changed. The increasing availability of effective disease-modifying therapies has shifted the aim of therapeutic interventions from a reduction in relapses and disability accrual, to the absence of any sign of clinical or MRI activity. The choice for therapy is increasingly complex and should be driven by an appropriate knowledge of the mechanisms of action of the different drugs and of their risk-benefit profile. Because the relapsing phase of the disease is characterised by inflammation, treatment should be started as early as possible and aim to re-establish the normal complex interactions in the immune system. Before starting a treatment, neurologists should carefully consider the state of the disease, its prognostic factors and comorbidities, the patient's response to previous treatments, and whether the patient is likely to accept treatment-related risks in order to maximise benefits and minimise risks. Early detection of suboptimum responders, thanks to accurate clinical monitoring, will allow clinicians to redesign treatment strategies where necessary.

Combined evaluation of personality, risk and coping in MS patients: A step towards individualized treatment choice - The PeRiCoMS-Study I

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory neurological disease requiring disease-modifying treatment (DMT). To provide patients with the optimal individual therapeutic option, treatment recommendations should be based not only on individual disease course and DMT specific benefit-risk estimates, but also on patient's individual characteristics such as personality, risk attitude and coping strategies. However, these characteristics are difficult to objectify in clinical routine practice without the support of appropriate evaluation instruments.

OBJECTIVE

To identify and to assemble an objective test battery measuring personality, risk attitude and coping strategies in MS patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed to obtain all questionnaires assessing personality, risk attitude and coping strategies. Availability in German language, validation in a published normative collective and a reliability of >0.70 were required for our purposes. Based on these criteria, we chose the Big-Five-Personality Test, UPPS Impulsive Behaviour Scale, Domain-Specific Risk-Taking scale (DOSPERT), Brief-COPE and Stress & Coping Inventory (SCI). Results were compared to published normative controls of the respective questionnaires.

RESULTS

Out of 22 MS patients (7 males, 15 females) participating in this study, 19 (86.4%) completed all questionnaires. The median completion time was 45min (min-max range: 25-60min). The median scores of the MS group were within the average range of published control samples in all questionnaires.

CONCLUSIONS

We report that traits of personality, risk attitude and coping strategies can be effectively and feasibly tested in MS patients by the instruments used in our exploratory study. There were no differences between MS patients and healthy controls, thus enabling assessment without being influenced by the diagnosis of MS. After validation in a larger cohort the "PeRiCoMS"-battery will be useful as another step towards a more individualized shared-decision-making in every day routine practice.

Optimization and stratification of multiple sclerosis treatment in fast developing economic countries: a perspective from Qatar

OBJECTIVE

The introduction of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) - with varying degrees of efficacy for reducing annual relapse rate and disability progression - has considerably transformed the therapeutic landscape of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). We aim to develop rational evidence-based treatment recommendations and algorithms for the management of clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) and RRMS that conform to the healthcare system in a fast-developing economic country such as Qatar.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review using a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1 January 1990 through 30 September 2016). Additional searches of the American Academy of Neurology and European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis abstracts from 2012 through 2016 were performed, in addition to searches of the Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency websites to obtain relevant safety information on these DMTs.

RESULTS

For each of the DMTs, the mode of action, efficacy, safety and tolerability are briefly discussed. To facilitate the interpretation, the efficacy data of the pivotal phase III trials are expressed by their most clinically useful measure of therapeutic efficacy, the number needed to treat (NNT). In addition, an overview of head-to-head trials in RRMS is provided as well as a summary of the several different RRMS management strategies (lateral switching, escalation, induction, maintenance and combination therapy) and the potential role of each DMT. Finally, algorithms were developed for CIS, active and highly active or rapidly evolving RRMS and subsequent breakthrough disease or suboptimal treatment response while on DMTs. The benefit-to-risk profiles of the DMTs, taking into account patient preference, allowed the provision of rational and safe patient-tailored treatment algorithms.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations and algorithms for the management of CIS and RRMS have been developed relevant to the healthcare system of this fast-developing economic country.

Cost-utility of First-line Disease-modifying Treatments for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of first-line treatments of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) (dimethyl fumarate [DMF] 240 mg PO BID, teriflunomide 14 mg once daily, glatiramer acetate 20 mg SC once daily, interferon [IFN]-β1a 44 µg TIW, IFN-β1b 250 µg EOD, and IFN-β1a 30 µg IM QW) and best supportive care (BSC) in the health care payer setting in Finland.

METHODS

The primary outcome was the modeled incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; €/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained, 3%/y discounting). Markov cohort modeling with a 15-year time horizon was employed. During each 1-year modeling cycle, patients either maintained the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score or experienced progression, developed secondary progressive MS (SPMS) or showed EDSS progression in SPMS, experienced relapse with/without hospitalization, experienced an adverse event (AE), or died. Patients׳ characteristics, RRMS progression probabilities, and standardized mortality ratios were derived from a registry of patients with MS in Finland. A mixed-treatment comparison (MTC) informed the treatment effects. Finnish EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire, Three-Level Version quality-of-life and direct-cost estimates associated with EDSS scores, relapses, and AEs were applied. Four approaches were used to assess the outcomes: cost-effectiveness plane and efficiency frontiers (relative value of efficient treatments); cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier, which demonstrated optimal treatment to maximize net benefit; Bayesian treatment ranking (BTR); and an impact investment assessment (IIA; a cost-benefit assessment), which increased the clinical interpretation and appeal of modeled outcomes in terms of absolute benefit gained with fixed drug-related budget. Robustness of results was tested extensively with sensitivity analyses.

FINDINGS

Based on the modeled results, teriflunomide was less costly, with greater QALYs, versus glatiramer acetate and the IFNs. Teriflunomide had the lowest ICER (24,081) versus BSC. DMF brought marginally more QALYs (0.089) than did teriflunomide, with greater costs over the 15 years. The ICER for DMF versus teriflunomide was 75,431. Teriflunomide had >50% cost-effectiveness probabilities with a willingness-to-pay threshold of <€77,416/QALY gained. According to BTR, teriflunomide was first-best among the disease-modifying therapies, with potential willingness-to-pay thresholds of up to €68,000/QALY gained. In the IIA, teriflunomide was associated with the longest incremental quality-adjusted survival and time without cane use. Generally, primary outcomes results were robust, based on the sensitivity analyses. The results were sensitive only to large changes in analysis perspective or mixed-treatment comparison.

IMPLICATIONS

The results were sensitive only to large changes in analysis perspective or MTC. Based on the analyses, teriflunomide was cost-effective versus BSC or DMF with the common threshold values, was dominant versus other first-line RRMS treatments, and provided the greatest impact on investment. Teriflunomide is potentially the most cost-effective option among first-line treatments of RRMS in Finland.

Intervening to reduce the risk of future disability from multiple sclerosis: are we there yet?

Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) delay or may prevent the progression of patients with high-risk clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) to clinically definite multiple sclerosis (MS), and from relapsing-remitting MS to secondary progressive MS. Current evidence on the effects of DMT on disability in MS is supported by the use of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), which is dominated by ambulation, and usually used as a secondary outcome measure. Less is known about the long-term effects of DMTs on other aspects of functional status, particularly cognition, which is a key determinant of ability to work. The time scale for measurements of disability is at most a few years, with scant data from more than 10 years of observation. Longer prospective follow-up of large numbers of patients with CIS is needed to determine whether early intervention with a DMT influences long-term disease progression. Finally, the emergence of the radiologically isolated syndrome (RIS) as a clinical entity has shifted the debate about when to intervene to an even earlier time frame. Balancing the significant side-effects associated with DMT in general and the expected outcome of pharmacologic intervention is increasingly problematic for managing patients with uncertain prognosis, as many patients may have low-risk CIS, benign MS or patients with RIS only. Preventing long-term disability in MS should be recognised more clearly as an important outcome in its own right, with disability measured more consistently with more sensitive instruments beyond the use of the EDSS.

From Leflunomide to Teriflunomide: Drug Development and Immunosuppressive Oral Drugs in the Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppressive drugs have been used in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) for a long time. Today, orally available second generation immunosuppressive agents have been approved or are filed for licensing as MS therapeutics. Due to semi-selective targeting of cellular processes, these second-generation immunosuppressive compounds might rather be immunomodulatory. For example, Teriflunomide inhibits the de novo pyrimidine synthesis and thus only targets rapidly proliferating cells, including lymphocytes. It is used as first line disease modifying therapy (DMT) in relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS).

METHODS

Review of online content related to oral immunosuppressants in MS with an emphasis on Teriflunomide.

RESULTS

Teriflunomide and Cladribine are second-generation immunosuppressants that are efficient in the treatment of MS patients. For Teriflunomide, a daily dose of 14 mg reduces the annualized relapse rate (ARR) by more than 30% and disability progression by 30% compared to placebo. Cladribine reduces the ARR by about 50% compared to placebo but has not yet been licensed due to unresolved safety concerns. We also discuss the significance of older immunosuppressive compounds including Azathioprine, Mycophenolate mofetile, and Cyclophosphamide in current MS therapy.

CONCLUSION

Teriflunomide has shown a favorable safety and efficacy profile in RRMS and is a therapeutic option for a distinct group of adult patients with RRMS.

Teriflunomide in multiple sclerosis: an update

Teriflunomide, a once-daily, oral disease-modifying therapy, has demonstrated efficacy in patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS) and patients with a first clinical episode suggestive of MS. As the only disease-modifying therapy with positive disability results in two Phase III trials, teriflunomide significantly slowed disability in patients with relapsing forms of MS. We highlight data from the Phase II study and the TEMSO, TOWER, TOPIC and TENERE teriflunomide studies. TEMSO MRI outcomes have been supported with Structural Image Evaluation Using Normalization of Atrophy analyses. We present data from long-term extensions of the Phase II study, TEMSO and TOWER, as well as results from patients who switched from other disease-modifying therapies to teriflunomide, patient-reported outcomes and supplementary measures of response.

["Time is brain" in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. Current treatment concepts in immunotherapy]

BACKGROUND

Despite highly divergent time scales of disease evolution in multiple sclerosis (MS) and ischemic stroke, clear analogies are apparent that may point the way to optimization of MS treatment. Inflammatory disease activity and neurodegeneration may induce potentially irreversible damage to central nervous system structures and thus lead to permanent disability. For the treatment of MS early detection of disease activity and early immunotherapy or treatment optimization are pivotal determinants of long-term outcomes. Such therapeutic concepts may be described with the catchy phrase "time is brain" as coined for the acute thrombolytic treatment of ischemic stroke.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

For MS a "time is brain" concept would comprise an early initiation of first line therapy as well as sensitive and structured monitoring of disease activity under therapy in conjunction with a low threshold for timely treatment optimization to achieve sustained freedom from measurable disease activity. This approach may substantially improve the long-term outcome in patients who show insufficient response to platform therapies. The intersectorial collaboration in regional MS care networks involving office-based neurologists and specialized MS centers may facilitate the timely use of highly active therapies with their specific benefit-risk profiles thus supporting sustained stabilization of patient quality of life.

Challenges in randomized controlled trials and emerging multiple sclerosis therapeutics

The remarkable global development of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) specific for multiple sclerosis (MS) has significantly reduced the frequency of relapse, slowed the progression of disability, and improved the quality of life in patients with MS. With increasing numbers of approved DMTs, neurologists in North America and Europe are able to present multiple treatment options to their patients to achieve a better therapeutic outcome, and in many cases, no evidence of disease activity. MS patients have improved accessibility to various DMTs at no or minimal out-of-pocket cost. The ethical guidelines defined by the Edinburgh revision of the Declaration of Helsinki strongly discourage the use of placebo control groups in modern MS clinical trials. The use of an active comparator control group increases the number of participants in each group that is essential to achieve statistical significance, thus further increasing the difficulty of completing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the development of new MS therapies. There is evidence of a high prevalence of MS and a large number of patients in Asia. The belief of the existence of Asian types of MS that are distinct from Western types, and regulatory policies are among the reasons why DMTs are limited in most Asian countries. Lack of access to approved DMTs provides a good opportunity for clinical trials that are designed for the development of new MS therapies. Recently, data from RCTs have demonstrated excellent recruitment of participants and the completion of multi-nation and single-nation MS trials within this region. Recent studies using the McDonald MS diagnostic criteria carefully excluded patients with neuromyelitis optica (NMO) and NMO spectrum disorder, and demonstrated that patients with MS in Asia have clinical characteristics and treatment responses similar to those in Western countries.

The Use of Oral Disease-Modifying Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis

Three oral disease-modifying drugs-fingolimod, teriflunomide, and dimethyl fumarate (DMF)-are available for treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). All three agents were approved in the last decade, primarily on the basis of a moderate to substantial reduction in the occurrence of MS relapses and central nervous system lesion formation detected by MRI. In the trials leading to approval, the first oral disease-modifying drug, fingolimod, reduced the annualized relapse rate (ARR) from 0.40 in placebo-treated patients to 0.18 (FREEDOMS) and from 0.33 in patients treated with interferon β1a intramuscularly to 0.16 (TRANSFORMS). Teriflunomide, approved on the basis of the two placebo-controlled trials TEMSO and TOWER, demonstrated a reduction in the ARR from 0.54 to 0.37 and from 0.50 to 0.32 respectively. The latest oral MS medication, approved in 2014, is DMF, which had been used in a different formulation for treatment of psoriasis for decades. In the 2-year DEFINE study, the proportion of patients with a relapse was reduced to 27 %, compared with 46 % in placebo arm, whereas in the CONFIRM trial, the ARR was reduced from 0.40 (placebo) to 0.22 in the DMF-treated group of patients. In this review, we will elucidate the mechanisms of action of these three medications and compare their efficacy, safety, and tolerability as a practical guideline for their use. We will further discuss effects other than relapse reduction these small molecules may exert, including potential activities within the central nervous system, and briefly summarize emerging data on new oral MS drugs in clinical development.

The efficacy and safety of teriflunomide based therapy in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of teriflunomide in reducing the frequency of relapses and progression of physical disability in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). Literatures were searched in Pubmed, Medline and Embase to screen citations from January 1990 to April 2015. Studies of parallel group design comparing teriflunomide and placebo for RMS were screened. After independent review of 234 citations by two authors, seven studies were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. The results showed teriflunomide (7 and 14mg) could significantly reduce annualized relapse rate and teriflunomide at the higher dose could also decrease the disability progression (risk ratio (RR)=0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55-0.87). And teriflunomide significantly reduce annualized rates of relapses with sequelae-EDSS/FS, relapses leading to hospitalization, and relapses requiring IV corticosteroids. Patients treated with teriflunomide 14mg have a lower annualized rate of relapses with sequelae-investigator (RR=0.37, 95% CI: 0.26-0.52). Teriflunomide 7mg has a higher incidence of diarrhea (RR=1.73, 95% CI: 1.32-2.26) and hair thinning (RR=1.99, 95% CI: 1.4-2.81), while teriflunomide 14mg has a higher incidence of diarrhea (RR=1.71, 95% CI: 1.34-2.18), hair thinning (RR=2.81, 95% CI: 2.02-3.91) and nausea (RR=1.65, 95% CI: 1.03-2.31) compared with placebo. The incidence of elevated alanine aminotransferase levels was also higher with teriflunomide than with placebo. However, the incidence of serious adverse events was similar across groups. In conclusion, teriflunomide significantly reduces annualized relapse rates and disability progression with a similar safety and tolerability profile to placebo.

Measuring treatment satisfaction in MS: Is the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication fit for purpose?

Background:

The Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) was designed to assess patient treatment satisfaction in chronic diseases. Its performance has not been examined in multiple sclerosis (MS). The 14 items of the TSQM cover four domains: Effectiveness, Side Effects, Convenience, and Global Satisfaction.

Objective:

To evaluate performance of the TSQM in patients with relapsing MS, using data collected from the TENERE study (NCT00883337), in which 324 patients received oral teriflunomide or subcutaneous interferon beta-1a for ⩾48 weeks.

Methods:

Five measurement properties were examined using traditional psychometric methods: data completeness, scale-to-sample targeting, scaling assumptions, reliability (including test–retest), and construct validity (internal: item-level scaling success, confirmatory factor analysis, and exploratory factor analysis; external: convergence, discrimination, and group differences).

Results:

There were few (<2%) missing item data; domain scores could be computed for all patients. Score distributions were skewed toward higher satisfaction; two domains had marked ceiling effects. Scaling assumptions were supported. Internal consistency reliability was high (Cronbach’s α > 0.90). Internal validity tests supported item groupings. Correlations supported convergent and discriminant construct validity; hypothesis testing supported group differences validity.

Conclusion:

This investigation found the TSQM to be a useful tool, exhibiting good psychometric measurement properties in patients with relapsing MS in the TENERE study.

Brain health: time matters in multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

We present international consensus recommendations for improving diagnosis, management and treatment access in multiple sclerosis (MS). Our vision is that these will be used widely among those committed to creating a better future for people with MS and their families.

METHODS

Structured discussions and literature searches conducted in 2015 examined the personal and economic impact of MS, current practice in diagnosis, treatment and management, definitions of disease activity and barriers to accessing disease-modifying therapies (DMTs).

RESULTS

Delays often occur before a person with symptoms suggestive of MS sees a neurologist. Campaigns to raise awareness of MS are needed, as are initiatives to improve access to MS healthcare professionals and services. We recommend a clear treatment goal: to maximize neurological reserve, cognitive function and physical function by reducing disease activity. Treatment should start early, with DMT and lifestyle measures. All parameters that predict relapses and disability progression should be included in the definition of disease activity and monitored regularly when practical. On suboptimal control of disease activity, switching to a DMT with a different mechanism of action should be considered. A shared decision-making process that embodies dialogue and considers all appropriate DMTs should be implemented. Monitoring data should be recorded formally in registries to generate real-world evidence. In many jurisdictions, access to DMTs is limited. To improve treatment access the relevant bodies should consider all costs to all parties when conducting economic evaluations and encourage the continuing investigation, development and use of cost-effective therapeutic strategies and alternative financing models.

CONCLUSIONS

The consensus findings of an international author group recommend a therapeutic strategy based on proactive monitoring and shared decision-making in MS. Early diagnosis and improved treatment access are also key components.

Consensus statement on the treatment of multiple sclerosis by the Spanish Society of Neurology in 2016

With the advent of new disease-modifying drugs, the treatment of multiple sclerosis is becoming increasingly complex. Using consensus statements is therefore advisable. The present consensus statement, which was drawn up by the Spanish Society of Neurology's study group for demyelinating diseases, updates previous consensus statements on the disease. The present study lists the medications currently approved for multiple sclerosis and their official indications, and analyses such treatment-related aspects as activity, early treatment, maintenance, follow-up, treatment failure, changes in medication, and special therapeutic situations. This consensus statement includes treatment recommendations for a wide range of demyelinating diseases, from isolated demyelinating syndromes to the different forms of multiple sclerosis, as well as recommendations for initial therapy and changes in drug medication, and additional comments on induction and combined therapy and practical aspects of the use of these drugs.

Pharmacological Approaches to Delaying Disability Progression in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis

In individuals with multiple sclerosis, physical and cognitive disability progression are clinical and pathophysiological hallmarks of the disease. Despite shortcomings, particularly in capturing cognitive deficits, the Expanded Disability Status Scale is the assessment of disability progression most widely used in clinical trials. Here, we review treatment effects on disability that have been reported in large clinical trials of disease-modifying treatment, both among patients with relapsing-remitting disease and among those with progressive disease. However, direct comparisons are confounded to some degree by the lack of consistency in assessment of disability progression across trials. Confirmed disability progression (CDP) is a more robust measure when performed over a 6-month than a 3-month interval, and reduction in the risk of 6-month CDP in phase III trials provides good evidence for the beneficial effects on disability of several high-efficacy treatments for relapsing-remitting disease. It is also becoming increasingly clear that therapies effective in relapsing-remitting disease have little impact on the course of progressive disease. Given that the pathophysiological mechanisms, which lead to the long-term accrual of physical and cognitive deficits, are evident at the earliest stages of disease, it remains a matter of debate whether the most effective therapies are administered early enough to afford patients the best long-term outcomes.

Immunological treatment of multiple sclerosis

Treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) has been a challenge since its first description by Charcot. The advent of immunomodulatory drugs in the mid 1990s brought the first big change in the treatment of MS patients. During the last 10 years there has been an ongoing tremendous evolution of novel treatment options for relapsing-remitting MS. These options include monoclonal antibodies, which inhibit migration of lymphocytes (natalizumab), deplete lymphocytes (alemtuzumab), or block the cytokine receptor interleukin (IL)-2 (daclizumab), teriflunomide that inhibits proliferation of activated lymphocytes, fingolimod that modulates the sphingosine-receptor system, and dimethylfumarate that combines features of immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive drugs. The topic of this review is to discuss currently available treatments and provide an outlook into the near future.

Teriflunomide for multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the Cochrane review "Teriflunomide for multiple sclerosis" (first published in The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12).Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic immune-mediated disease of the central nervous system. It is clinically characterized by recurrent relapses or progression, or both, often leading to severe neurological disability and a serious decline in quality of life. Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for MS aim to prevent occurrence of relapses and disability progression. Teriflunomide is a pyrimidine synthesis inhibitor approved by both the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as a DMT for adults with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the absolute and comparative effectiveness and safety of teriflunomide as monotherapy or combination therapy versus placebo or other disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) (interferon beta (IFNβ), glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab) for modifying the disease course in people with MS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group Specialised Trials Register (30 September 2015). We checked reference lists of published reviews and retrieved articles and searched reports (2004 to September 2015) from the MS societies in Europe and America. We also communicated with investigators participating in trials of teriflunomide and the pharmaceutical company, Sanofi-Aventis.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized, controlled, parallel-group clinical trials with a length of follow-up of one year or greater evaluating teriflunomide, as monotherapy or combination therapy, versus placebo or other approved DMDs for people with MS without restrictions regarding dose, administration frequency and duration of treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures of Cochrane. Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Disagreements were discussed and resolved by consensus among the review authors. We contacted the principal investigators of included studies for additional data or confirmation of data.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies involving 3231 people evaluated the efficacy and safety of teriflunomide 7 mg and 14 mg, alone or with add-on IFNβ, versus placebo or IFNβ-1a for adults with relapsing forms of MS and an entry Expanded Disability Status Scale score of less than 5.5.Overall, there were obvious clinical heterogeneities due to diversities in study designs or interventions and methodological heterogeneities across studies. All studies had a high risk of detection bias for relapse assessment and a high risk of bias due to conflicts of interest. Among them, three studies additionally had a high risk of attrition bias due to a high dropout rate and two studies had an unclear risk of attrition bias. The studies of combination therapy with IFNβ (650 participants) and the study with IFNβ-1a as controls (324 participants) also had a high risk for performance bias and a lack of power due to the limited sample.Two studies evaluated the benefit and the safety of teriflunomide as monotherapy versus placebo over a period of one year (1169 participants) or two years (1088 participants). A meta-analysis was not conducted. Compared to placebo, administration of teriflunomide at a dose of 7 mg/day or 14 mg/day as monotherapy reduced the number of participants with at least one relapse over one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.87, P value = 0.001 with 7 mg/day and RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.75, P value < 0.00001 with 14 mg/day) or two years (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.98, P value = 0.03 with 7 mg/day and RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93, P value = 0.004 with 14 days). Only teriflunomide at a dose of 14 mg/day reduced the number of participants with disability progression over one year (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.84, P value = 0.006) or two years (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96, P value = 0.02). When taking the effect of drop-outs into consideration, the likely-case scenario analyses still showed a benefit in reducing the number of participants with at least one relapse, but not for the number of participants with disability progression. Both doses also reduced the annualized relapse rate and the number of gadolinium-enhancing T1-weighted lesions over two years. Quality of evidence for relapse outcomes at one year or at two years was low, while for disability progression at one year or at two years was very low.When compared to IFNβ-1a, teriflunomide at a dose of 14 mg/day had a similar efficacy to IFNβ-1a in reducing the proportion of participants with at least one relapse over one year, while teriflunomide at a dose of 7 mg/day was inferior to IFNβ-1a (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.67, P value = 0.14; 215 participants with 14 mg/day and RR 2.74, 95% CI 1.66 to 4.53, P value < 0.0001; 213 participants with 7 mg/day). However, the quality of evidence was very low.In terms of safety profile, the most common adverse events associated with teriflunomide were diarrhoea, nausea, hair thinning, elevated alanine aminotransferase, neutropenia and lymphopenia. These adverse events had a dose-related effects and rarely led to treatment discontinuation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was low-quality evidence to support that teriflunomide at a dose of 7 mg/day or 14 mg/day as monotherapy reduces both the number of participants with at least one relapse and the annualized relapse rate over one year or two years of treatment in comparison with placebo. Only teriflunomide at a dose of 14 mg/day reduced the number of participants with disability progression and delayed the progression of disability over one year or two years, but the quality of the evidence was very low. The quality of available data was too low to evaluate the benefit teriflunomide as monotherapy versus IFNβ-1a or as combination therapy with IFNβ. The common adverse effects were diarrhoea, nausea, hair thinning, elevated alanine aminotransferase, neutropenia and lymphopenia. These adverse effects were mostly mild-to-moderate in severity, but had a dose-related effect. New studies of high quality and longer follow-up are needed to evaluate the comparative benefit of teriflunomide on these outcomes and the safety in comparison with other DMTs.

Disease-modifying therapies and infectious risks in multiple sclerosis

Immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS) are associated with an increased risk of infection, which makes treatment of this condition challenging in daily clinical practice. Use of the expanding range of available drugs to treat MS requires extensive knowledge of treatment-associated infections, risk-minimizing strategies and approaches to monitoring and treatment of such adverse events. An interdisciplinary approach to evaluate the infectious events associated with available MS treatments has become increasingly relevant. In addition, individual stratification of treatment-related infectious risks is necessary when choosing therapies for patients with MS, as well as during and after therapy. Determination of the individual risk of infection following serial administration of different immunotherapies is also crucial. Here, we review the modes of action of the available MS drugs, and relate this information to the current knowledge of drug-specific infectious risks and risk-minimizing strategies.

Inhibition of hepatic cytochrome P450 enzymes and sodium/bile acid cotransporter exacerbates leflunomide-induced hepatotoxicity

AIM

Leflunomide is an immunosuppressive agent marketed as a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. But it causes severe side effects, including fatal hepatitis and liver failure. In this study we investigated the contributions of hepatic metabolism and transport of leflunomide and its major metabolite teriflunomide to leflunomide induced hepatotoxicity in vitro and in vivo.

METHODS

The metabolism and toxicity of leflunomide and teriflunomide were evaluated in primary rat hepatocytes in vitro. Hepatic cytochrome P450 reductase null (HRN) mice were used to examine the PK profiling and hepatotoxicity of leflunomide in vivo. The expression and function of sodium/bile acid cotransporter (NTCP) were assessed in rat and human hepatocytes and NTCP-transfected HEK293 cells. After Male Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were administered teriflunomide (1,6, 12 mg · kg(-1) · d(-1), ig) for 4 weeks, their blood samples were analyzed.

RESULTS

A nonspecific CYPs inhibitor aminobenzotriazole (ABT, 1 mmol/L) decreased the IC50 value of leflunomide in rat hepatocytes from 409 to 216 μmol/L, whereas another nonspecific CYPs inhibitor proadifen (SKF, 30 μmol/L) increased the cellular accumulation of leflunomide to 3.68-fold at 4 h. After oral dosing (15 mg/kg), the plasma exposure (AUC0-t) of leflunomide increased to 3-fold in HRN mice compared with wild type mice. Administration of leflunomide (25 mg·kg(-1) · d(-1)) for 7 d significantly increased serum ALT and AST levels in HRN mice; when the dose was increased to 50 mg·kg(-1) · d(-1), all HRN mice died on d 6. Teriflunomide significantly decreased the expression of NTCP in human hepatocytes, as well as the function of NTCP in rat hepatocytes and NTCP-transfected HEK293 cells. Four-week administration of teriflunomide significantly increased serum total bilirubin and direct bilirubin levels in female rats, but not in male rats.

CONCLUSION

Hepatic CYPs play a critical role in detoxification process of leflunomide, whereas the major metabolite teriflunomide suppresses the expression and function of NTCP, leading to potential cholestasis.

Cutaneous Adverse Effects of Neurologic Medications

Life-threatening and benign drug reactions occur frequently in the skin, affecting 8 % of the general population and 2-3 % of all hospitalized patients, emphasizing the need for physicians to effectively recognize and manage patients with drug-induced eruptions. Neurologic medications represent a vast array of drug classes with cutaneous side effects. Approximately 7 % of the United States (US) adult population is affected by adult-onset neurological disorders, reflecting a large number of patients on neurologic drug therapies. This review elucidates the cutaneous reactions associated with medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat the following neurologic pathologies: Alzheimer disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, epilepsy, Huntington disease, migraine, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson disease, and pseudobulbar affect. A search of the literature was performed using the specific FDA-approved drug or drug classes in combination with the terms 'dermatologic,' 'cutaneous,' 'skin,' or 'rash.' Both PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were utilized, with side effects ranging from those cited in randomized controlled trials to case reports. It behooves neurologists, dermatologists, and primary care physicians to be aware of the recorded cutaneous adverse reactions and their severity for proper management and potential need to withdraw the offending medication.

Long-term safety and efficacy of teriflunomide: Nine-year follow-up of the randomized TEMSO study

Objective:

To report safety and efficacy outcomes from up to 9 years of treatment with teriflunomide in an extension (NCT00803049) of the pivotal phase 3 Teriflunomide Multiple Sclerosis Oral (TEMSO) trial (NCT00134563).

Methods:

A total of 742 patients entered the extension. Teriflunomide-treated patients continued the original dose; those previously receiving placebo were randomized 1:1 to teriflunomide 14 mg or 7 mg.

Results:

By June 2013, median (maximum) teriflunomide exposure exceeded 190 (325) weeks per patient; 468 patients (63%) remained on treatment. Teriflunomide was well-tolerated with continued exposure. The most common adverse events (AEs) matched those in the core study. In extension year 1, first AEs of transient liver enzyme increases or reversible hair thinning were generally attributable to patients switching from placebo to teriflunomide. Approximately 11% of patients discontinued treatment owing to AEs. Twenty percent of patients experienced serious AEs. There were 3 deaths unrelated to teriflunomide. Soon after the extension started, annualized relapse rates and gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesion counts fell in patients switching from placebo to teriflunomide, remaining low thereafter. Disability remained stable in all treatment groups (median Expanded Disability Status Scale score ≤2.5; probability of 12-week disability progression ≤0.48).

Conclusions:

In the TEMSO extension, safety observations were consistent with the core trial, with no new or unexpected AEs in patients receiving teriflunomide for up to 9 years. Disease activity decreased in patients switching from placebo and remained low in patients continuing on teriflunomide.

Classification of evidence:

This study provides Class III evidence that long-term treatment with teriflunomide is well-tolerated and efficacy of teriflunomide is maintained long-term.

Classification, diagnosis, and differential diagnosis of multiple sclerosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The increasing availability of effective therapies for multiple sclerosis as well as research demonstrating the benefits of early treatment highlights the importance of expedient and accurate multiple sclerosis diagnosis. This review will discuss the classification, diagnosis, and differential diagnosis of multiple sclerosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

An international panel of multiple sclerosis experts, the MS Phenotype Group, recently revised the multiple sclerosis phenotypic classifications and published their recommendations in 2014. Recent research developments have helped improve the accuracy of multiple sclerosis diagnosis, especially with regard to differentiating multiple sclerosis from neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders.

SUMMARY

Current multiple sclerosis phenotypic classifications include relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, clinically isolated syndrome, radiologically isolated syndrome, primary-progressive multiple sclerosis, and secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis. The McDonald 2010 diagnostic criteria provide formal guidelines for the diagnosis of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and primary-progressive multiple sclerosis. These require demonstration of dissemination in space and time, with consideration given to both clinical findings and imaging data. The criteria also require that there exist no better explanation for the patient's presentation. The clinical history, examination, and MRI should be most consistent with multiple sclerosis, including the presence of features typical for the disease as well as the absence of features that suggest an alternative cause, for a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis to be proposed.

Established disease-modifying treatments in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to summarize mechanisms of action, efficacy and safety of established disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) that have been widely approved for use in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

RECENT FINDINGS

Established and widely used DMTs for the treatment of RRMS include the interferon-β agents, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, fingolimod, teriflunomide and dimethyl fumarate. These DMTs have quite different mechanisms of action, efficacy and safety and tolerability profiles, which are summarized concisely in the article below.

SUMMARY

The treatment algorithm for RRMS is becoming increasingly complex with the ever-expanding armamentarium of DMTs. The choice of DMT will become an increasingly individual decision, based on a number of factors, including disease activity and severity, safety/tolerability profile and patient preference. Neurologists treating patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) will need a thorough knowledge of efficacy, safety and tolerability of the spectrum of DMTs available for treatment of RRMS to provide comprehensive clinical care.

Teriflunomide in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Forms of Multiple Sclerosis

Teriflunomide is a once-daily oral agent that has been licensed in the EU since August 2013 for the treatment of adult patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). More recently (September 2014), the EU summary of product characteristics (SmPC) was updated to include data from patients with a first clinical demyelinating event. This review examines the EU SmPC for teriflunomide, with reference to key clinical and safety outcomes and practical considerations for prescribing physicians. In two phase III trials (TEMSO and TOWER) in patients with relapsing forms of MS, teriflunomide 14 mg significantly reduced the annualized relapse rate and the risk of confirmed disability progression sustained for at least 12 weeks. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) total lesion volume, gadolinium-enhancing lesions, and unique active lesions were reduced with teriflunomide treatment in TEMSO. In the TOPIC study, in patients with a first clinical demyelinating event, teriflunomide treatment significantly reduced the time to a second clinical episode (relapse). Across the clinical studies, teriflunomide was generally well tolerated; adverse events reported in ≥ 10% of teriflunomide-treated patients were diarrhea, nausea, increased alanine aminotransferase, and alopecia. Data from the clinical development program support the use of teriflunomide in a broad spectrum of patients with RRMS.

Disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis - a review of approved medications

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is still no curative treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS), but during the last 20 years eight different disease-modifying compounds have been approved for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS).

METHODS

A literature search was conducted on published randomized controlled phase III trials indexed in PubMed on the approved medications until 21 May 2015.

RESULTS

In this review the mode of action, documented treatment effects and side effects of the approved MS therapies are briefly discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on current knowledge of risk-benefit of the approved MS medications, including factors influencing adherence, it is suggested that oral treatment with dimethyl fumarate or teriflunomide should be preferred as a starting therapy amongst the first-line preparations for de novo RRMS. In the case of breakthrough disease on first-line therapy, or rapidly evolving severe RRMS, second-line therapy with natalizumab, fingolimod or alemtuzumab should be chosen based on careful risk-benefit stratification.

Optimizing treatment success in multiple sclerosis

Despite important advances in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) over recent years, the introduction of several disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), the burden of progressive disability and premature mortality associated with the condition remains substantial. This burden, together with the high healthcare and societal costs associated with MS, creates a compelling case for early treatment optimization with highly efficacious therapies. Often, patients receive several first-line therapies, while more recent and in part more effective treatments are still being introduced only after these have failed. However, with the availability of highly efficacious therapies, a novel treatment strategy has emerged, where the aim is to achieve no evidence of disease activity (NEDA). Achieving NEDA necessitates regular monitoring of relapses, disability and functionality. However, there is only a poor correlation between conventional magnetic resonance imaging measures like T2 hyperintense lesion burden and the level of clinical disability. Hence, MRI-based measures of brain atrophy have emerged in recent years potentially reflecting the magnitude of MS-related neuroaxonal damage. Currently available DMTs differ markedly in their effects on brain atrophy: some, such as fingolimod, have been shown to significantly slow brain volume loss, compared to placebo, whereas others have shown either no, inconsistent, or delayed effects. In addition to regular monitoring, treatment optimization also requires early intervention with efficacious therapies, because accumulating evidence shows that effective intervention during a limited period early in the course of MS is critical for maintaining neurological function and preventing subsequent disability. Together, the advent of new MS therapies and evolving management strategies offer exciting new opportunities to optimize treatment outcomes.

Multiple sclerosis--new treatment modalities

Ever since the introduction of the first disease modifying therapies, the concept of multiple sclerosis treatment algorithms developed ceaselessly. The increasing number of available drugs is paralleled by impelling issue of ensuring the most appropriate treatment to the right patient at the right time. The purpose of this review is to describe novel agents recently approved for multiple sclerosis treatment, namely teriflunomide, alemtuzumab and dimethylfumarate, focusing on mechanism of action, efficacy data in experimental setting, safety and tolerability. The place in therapy of newer treatment implies careful balancing of risk-benefit profile as well as accurate patient selection. Hence the widening of therapeutic arsenal provides greater opportunity for personalized therapy but also entails a complex trade-off between efficacy, tolerability, safety and eventually patient preference.

Balancing Early Aggression Against Risk of Progression in Multiple Sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis is a chronic demyelinating disease characterized by focal and diffuse inflammation of the central nervous system resulting in significant physical and cognitive disabilities. Disease-modifying therapies targeting the dysfunctional immune response are most effective in the first few years after disease onset, indicating that there is a limited time window for therapy to influence the disease course. No evidence of disease activity is emerging as a new standard for treatment response and may be associated with improved long-term disability outcomes. An aggressive management strategy, including earlier use of more potent immunomodulatory agents and close monitoring of the clinical and radiologic response to treatment, is recommended to minimize early brain volume loss and slow the progression of physical and cognitive impairments in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

Optimizing the initial choice and timing of therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

With 12 available US Food and Drug Administration approved medications for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS), choosing an initial therapy is no longer a straightforward task. Each disease-modifying therapy (DMT) has a distinct risk-benefit profile and each patient is an individual. Therefore, the development of a simple algorithm to apply in selecting initial therapy is not feasible. Instead, the prescribing physician must consider many factors related to the treatments themselves, such as efficacy, safety, and tolerability, while also taking into account a particular patient's disease characteristics, personal preferences, comorbid illnesses and reproductive plans. The efficacy of each drug may be assessed through clinical trial data, although these data are limited by scarcity of direct comparisons among the different agents and lack of availability of biomarkers to predict an individual patient's response. Differences in safety profiles help to distinguish the various DMTs and influence selection of agent; both the known safety concerns, which can be addressed with risk mitigation and monitoring strategies, and the potential for yet undiscovered safety issues must be assessed, and an individual patient's comfort level with the risks and ability to comply with monitoring must be determined. Potential issues related to tolerability, which largely relate to matters of patient personal preference and lifestyle, should also be factored into the decision-making process. With regard to the timing of therapy initiation, it must be acknowledged that long-term benefits of early DMT have not yet been definitively demonstrated. Nonetheless, starting DMT early in the MS disease course has been shown to have a beneficial effect on relapse prevention, and appears to curtail the atrophy and neurodegenerative changes that are now known to begin at disease onset. Although under certain circumstances there are acceptable reasons for deferring treatment, it is generally recommended that DMT is initiated early in the disease course.

The effect of disease-modifying therapies on brain atrophy in patients with clinically isolated syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Brain atrophy is associated with cognitive deficits in patients with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) and can predict conversion to clinical definite multiple sclerosis. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) on brain atrophy in patients with CIS.

METHODS

Eligible placebo-control randomized clinical trials of patients with CIS that had reported changes in brain volume during the study period were identified by searching the MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases. This meta-analysis adopted the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Three eligible studies were identified, comprising 1362 patients. The mean percentage change in brain volume was found to be significantly lower in DMD-treated patients versus placebo-treated subgroups (standardized mean difference [SMD]: = -0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.25, 0.01; p = 0.04). In the subgroup analysis of the two studies that provided data on brain-volume changes for the first (0-12 months) and second (13-24 months) year of treatment, DMD attenuated brain-volume loss in comparison with placebo during the second year (SMD = -0.25; 95% CI: -0.43, -0.07; p < 0.001), but not during the first year of treatment (SMD = -0.01; 95% CI: -0.27, 0.24; p = 0.93). No evidence of heterogeneity was found between estimates, while funnel-plot inspection revealed no evidence of publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

DMDs appear to attenuate brain atrophy over time in patients with CIS. The effect of DMDs on brain-volume loss is evident after the first year of treatment.

The Effect of Three Times a Week Glatiramer Acetate on Cerebral T1 Hypointense Lesions in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Two definitions of T1 hypointense (T1H) lesions can be derived from pre‐contrast images: those that may or may not have a corresponding gadolinium‐enhancing correlate on post‐contrast images (T1H total), and those that are simultaneously non‐gadolinium‐enhancing on post‐contrast scans (T1H non‐enhancing). To determine the differences in lesion evolution between these two T1H definitions, we examined the effect of glatiramer acetate 40 mg/mL three times weekly subcutaneous injection (GA40) on the number of new or enlarging T1H total and T1H non‐enhancing lesions in patients with relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

METHODS

The Phase III GALA study randomized 1404 RRMS subjects 2:1 to receive GA40 or placebo for 12 months. MRI scans were obtained at baseline and at months 6 and 12. Cumulative numbers of T1H total and of T1H non‐enhancing lesions were analyzed using an adjusted negative binomial regression model. A total of 1,357 patients had MRI data collected at either the month 6 or month 12 visit.

RESULTS

Among the 1,357 patients with MRI scans performed at either the month 6 or month 12 visit, 883 treated with GA40 developed an adjusted cumulative mean of 1.72 T1H total lesions versus 2.62 in 440 placebo controls (risk ratio, .66; 95% CI, .54‐.80; P < .0001). On T1H non‐enhanced scans, GA40‐treated patients developed an adjusted cumulative mean of 1.35 T1H non‐enhancing lesions versus 1.91 in placebo controls (risk ratio, .71; CI, .58‐.87; P = .0009).

CONCLUSIONS

GA40 significantly reduced the number of new or enlarging T1H total lesions and T1H non‐enhancing lesions compared with placebo. Although the treatment effect magnitude was comparable with both definitions, the use of T1H non‐enhancing lesions may be more relevant for more uniform standardization in future clinical trials.

Novel Agents for Relapsing Forms of Multiple Sclerosis

Since 2004, five drugs with new mechanisms of action have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). The expanded armamentarium of treatment options offers new opportunities for improved disease control and increased tolerability of medications, and also presents new safety concerns and monitoring requirements with which physicians must familiarize themselves. We review each of the newly approved agents-natalizumab, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, and alemtuzumab-with regard to their mechanism of action, clinical trial data, safety and tolerability concerns, and monitoring requirements. We also review available data for promising agents that are currently in late-phase clinical trials, including daclizumab, ocrelizumab, and ofatumumab.

Teriflunomide: a once-daily oral medication for the treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis

PURPOSE

The purpose was to summarize US prescribing information for teriflunomide in the treatment of patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (RMS), with reference to clinical efficacy and safety outcomes.

METHODS

In September 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration granted approval for the use of teriflunomide, 14 mg and 7 mg once daily, to treat RMS on the basis of the results of a Phase II study and the Phase III TEMSO (Teriflunomide Multiple Sclerosis Oral) trial. After recent updates to the prescribing information (October 2014), key findings from these and 2 other Phase III clinical trials, TOWER (Teriflunomide Oral in People With Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis) and TOPIC (Oral Teriflunomide for Patients with a First Clinical Episode Suggestive of Multiple Sclerosis), and practical considerations for physicians are summarized.

FINDINGS

Teriflunomide, 14 mg and 7 mg, significantly reduced mean number of unique active lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI; P < 0.05 for both doses) in the Phase II study. In the TEMSO and TOWER studies, the 14-mg dose of teriflunomide significantly reduced annualized relapse rate (31% and 36% relative risk reduction compared with placebo, respectively; both P < 0.001) and risk of disability progression sustained for 12 weeks (hazard ratio vs placebo 0.70 and 0.69, respectively; both P < 0.05). The 7-mg dose significantly (P < 0.02) reduced annualized relapse rate in both studies, although the reduction in risk of disability progression was not statistically significant. Teriflunomide treatment was also associated with significant efficacy on MRI measures of disease activity in TEMSO; both doses significantly reduced total lesion volume and number of gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions. TOPIC evaluated patients with a first clinical event consistent with acute demyelination and brain MRI lesions characteristic of multiple sclerosis. More patients were free of relapse in the teriflunomide 14-mg and 7-mg groups than in the placebo group (P < 0.05 for both comparisons). In safety data pooled from the 4 studies, adverse events occurring in ≥2% of patients and ≥2% higher than in the placebo group were headache, alanine aminotransferase increase, diarrhea, alopecia (hair thinning), nausea, paresthesia, arthralgia, neutropenia, and hypertension. Routine monitoring procedures before and on treatment are recommended to assess potential safety issues. Women of childbearing potential must use effective contraception and, in the event of pregnancy, undergo an accelerated elimination procedure to reduce plasma concentrations of teriflunomide.

IMPLICATIONS

Clinical evidence suggests that teriflunomide is an effective therapeutic choice for patients with RMS, both as an initial treatment and as an alternative for patients who may have experienced intolerance or inadequate response to a previous or current disease-modifying therapy.

Risk Mitigation Strategies for Adverse Reactions Associated with the Disease-Modifying Drugs in Multiple Sclerosis

Over the past several years, the number of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) has doubled in number. The 13 approved agents have shown a wide range of efficacy and safety in their clinical trials and post-marketing experience. While the availability of the newer agents allows for a wider selection of therapy for clinicians and patients, there is a need for careful understanding of the benefits and risks of each agent. Several factors such as the medication efficacy, side-effect profile, patient's preference, and co-morbidities need to be considered. An individualized treatment approach is thus imperative. In this review, risk stratification and mitigation strategies of the various disease-modifying agents are discussed.

Fatal toxic epidermal necrolysis in a patient on teriflunomide treatment for relapsing multiple sclerosis

We report a case of toxic epidermal necrolysis in a 46-year-old woman on teriflunomide treatment. Such a severe adverse cutaneous drug reaction with this new therapy for relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis should be early recognized in order to ensure the rapid withdrawal of the drug.

Treatment strategies for multiple sclerosis: When to start, when to change, when to stop?

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory condition of the central nervous system determined by a presumed autoimmune process mainly directed against myelin components but also involving axons and neurons. Acute demyelination shows as clinical relapses that may fully or partially resolve, while chronic demyelination and neuroaxonal injury lead to persistent and irreversible neurological symptoms, often progressing over time. Currently approved disease-modifying therapies are immunomodulatory or immunosuppressive drugs that significantly although variably reduce the frequency of attacks of the relapsing forms of the disease. However, they have limited efficacy in preventing the transition to the progressive phase of MS and are of no benefit after it has started. It is therefore likely that the potential advantage of a given treatment is condensed in a relatively limited window of opportunity for each patient, depending on individual characteristics and disease stage, most frequently but not necessarily in the early phase of the disease. In addition, a sizable proportion of patients with MS may have a very mild clinical course not requiring a disease-modifying therapy. Finally, individual response to existing therapies for MS varies significantly across subjects and the risk of serious adverse events remains an issue, particularly for the newest agents. The present review is aimed at critically describing current treatment strategies for MS with a particular focus on the decision of starting, switching and stopping commercially available immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive therapies.