Severe drug-induced liver injury related to therapy with dimethyl fumarate

The Disease-Modifying Therapies of Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis and Liver Injury: A Narrative Review

In this narrative review, we analyze pre-registration and post-marketing data concerning hepatotoxicity of all disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) available for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, including beta interferon, glatiramer acetate, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, cladribine, natalizumab, alemtuzumab, and ocrelizumab. We review the proposed causal mechanisms described in the literature and we also address issues like use of DMTs in patients with viral hepatitis or liver cirrhosis. Most data emerged in the post-marketing phase by reports to national pharmacovigilance agencies and published case reports or case series. Serious liver adverse events are rare, but exact incidence is largely unknown, as are predictive factors. Unfortunately, none of the DMTs currently available for the treatment of multiple sclerosis is free of potential hepatic toxic effects. Cases of acute liver failure have been reported for beta-interferon, fingolimod, natalizumab, alemtuzumab, and ocrelizumab by different mechanisms (idiosyncratic reaction, autoimmune hepatitis, or viral reactivation). Patients with multiple sclerosis should be informed about possible hepatic side effects of their treatment. Most cases of liver injury are idiosyncratic and unpredictable. The specific monitoring schedule for each DMT has been reviewed and the clinician should be ready to recognize clinical symptoms suggestive for liver injury. Not all DMTs are indicated in cirrhotic patients. For some DMTs, screening for hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus is required before starting treatment and a monitoring or antiviral prophylaxis schedule has been established. Beta interferon, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, and alemtuzumab are relatively contraindicated in autoimmune hepatitis due to the risk of disease exacerbation.

Practical recommendations for systemic treatment in psoriasis according to age, pregnancy, metabolic syndrome, mental health, psoriasis subtype and treatment history (BETA-PSO: Belgian Evidence-based Treatment Advice in Psoriasis; part 1)

Background

Impressive progress in new therapeutic options has been made for psoriasis. Treatments include topical steroids, phototherapy, conventional, synthetic disease‐modifying drugs and an expanding list of biologics.

Objective

The primary objective of this work was to collect evidence for the creation of practice guidelines for systemic treatment of psoriasis (BETA‐PSO: Belgian Evidence‐based Treatment Advice in Psoriasis).

Methods

Evidence‐based recommendations were formulated using a quasi‐Delphi methodology after a systematic search of the literature and a consensus procedure involving 8 psoriasis experts.

Results

In this part, the use of systemic treatment in different age groups, during pregnancy, in metabolic syndrome, in patients with mental health problems, in different psoriasis subtypes and in previously systemically treated patients treatment is discussed.

Conclusion

Guidance on therapeutic choice in specific clinical situations in psoriasis is provided in order to facilitate the decision‐making in clinical practice.

Do dimethyl fumarate and nicotinic acid elicit common, potentially HCA2 -mediated adverse reactions? A combined epidemiological-experimental approach

AIM

Dimethyl fumarate and nicotinic acid activate the hydroxy-carboxylic acid receptor 2 (HCA₂ ) and induce flushing. It is not known whether HCA₂ mediates other adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to these two substances. This study aims to compare ADRs associated with dimethyl fumarate and nicotinic acid, and to discuss whether they are HCA₂ -mediated.

METHODS

We identified spontaneous reports of suspected ADRs to dimethyl fumarate and nicotinic acid in the European Adverse Drug Reaction Database (EudraVigilance). These reports were analysed at different hierarchical levels of the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA). In addition, we screened murine organs for HCA₂ expression.

RESULTS

Similarities in the ADR profile of dimethyl fumarate and nicotinic acid included "gastrointestinal signs and symptoms" (odds ratio [OR] 0.8 [0.6-1.1]), "hepatobiliary investigations" (OR 1.3 [0.7-2.5]) and "anxiety disorders and symptoms" (OR 0.9 [0.3-2.2]) in High Level Group Terms; "diarrhoea (excluding infective)" (OR 1.2 [0.7-1.8]) and "liver function analyses" (OR 1.3 [0.7-2.6]) in High Level Terms; and "diarrhoea" (OR 1.2 [0.7-2.0]) and "vomiting" (OR 0.9 [0.4-1.7]) in Preferred Terms. In analogy, HCA₂ was expressed in the gastrointestinal tract, liver and central nervous system (CNS) of murine organs. A discrepant ADR profile was seen for "lymphopenia" (n = 777) at the preferred term level (only reported for dimethyl fumarate) and "blood glucose increased" (more often reported for nicotinic acid; OR 0.1 [0.0-0.5]).

CONCLUSION

The gastrointestinal ADRs common to both substances may be mediated by HCA₂ . Other ADRs not common to both substances are compound or indication-specific reactions and likely do not involve HCA₂ .

Risks and risk management in modern multiple sclerosis immunotherapeutic treatment

In recent years, there has been a paradigm shift in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) owing to the approval of a number of new drugs with very distinct mechanisms of action. All approved disease-modifying drugs primarily work directly on the immune system. However, the identification of an ‘optimal choice’ for individual patients with regard to treatment efficacy, treatment adherence and side-effect profile has become increasingly complex including conceptual as well as practical considerations. Similarly, there are peculiarities and specific requirements with regard to treatment monitoring, especially in relation to immunosuppression, the development of secondary immune-related complications, as well as the existence of drug-specific on- and off-target effects. Both classical immunosuppression and selective immune interventions generate a spectrum of potential therapy-related complications. This article provides a comprehensive overview of available immunotherapeutics for MS and their risks, detailing individual mechanisms of action and side-effect profiles. Furthermore, practical recommendations for patients treated with modern MS immunotherapeutics are provided.

Liver injury with drugs used for multiple sclerosis: A contemporary analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System

Background:

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) has been observed in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), raising concerns on the liver safety of MS drugs.

Objective:

To describe DILI events with MS drugs by analyzing the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System.

Methods:

DILI reports were extracted and classified in overall liver injury (OLI), including asymptomatic elevation of liver enzymes, and severe liver injury (SLI). We performed disproportionality analysis by calculating adjusted reporting odds ratios (RORs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and case-by-case evaluation for concomitant drugs with hepatotoxic potential.

Results:

Fampridine showed statistically significant ROR for both OLI and SLI, whereas teriflunomide and fingolimod generated solid disproportionality (ROR > 2) only for OLI (ROR, 2.31; 95% CI, 2.12–2.52; and 2.53; 2.40–2.66, respectively). Among monoclonal antibodies, only alemtuzumab generated higher-than-expected ROR for OLI (1.34; 1.09–1.65). We also detected the expected hepatotoxic potential of beta interferon and mitoxantrone. Concomitant reporting of hepatotoxic drugs ranged from 26% (dimethyl fumarate) to 90% (mitoxantrone).

Conclusion:

These real-world pharmacovigilance findings suggest that DILI might be a common feature of MS drugs and call for (1) formal population-based study to verify the risk of fampridine and (2) awareness by clinicians, who should assess the possible responsibility of MS drugs when they diagnose DILI.

Liver injury associated with dimethyl fumarate in multiple sclerosis patients

BACKGROUND

In pre-approval trials, there was an increased incidence of mild, transient elevations of liver aminotransferases in study subjects treated with dimethyl fumarate (DMF).

OBJECTIVE/METHODS

To evaluate post-marketing cases of drug-induced liver injury associated with DMF.

RESULTS

We identified 14 post-marketing cases of clinically significant liver injury. Findings included newly elevated serum liver aminotransferase and bilirubin levels that developed as early as a few days after the first dose of DMF. The pattern of liver injury was primarily hepatocellular. No cases resulted in liver failure.

CONCLUSION

Health professionals should be alerted to possible serious liver injury in patients receiving DMF.