Comparison of interferon beta products and azathioprine in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different therapeutic strategies are available for the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), including immunomodulators, immunosuppressants and biological agents. Although each one of these therapies reduces relapse frequency and slows disability accumulation compared to no treatment, their relative benefit remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety, through network meta-analysis, of interferon beta-1b, interferon beta-1a, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab, pegylated interferon beta-1a, daclizumab, laquinimod, azathioprine, immunoglobulins, cladribine, cyclophosphamide, diroximel fumarate, fludarabine, interferon beta 1-a and beta 1-b, leflunomide, methotrexate, minocycline, mycophenolate mofetil, ofatumumab, ozanimod, ponesimod, rituximab, siponimod and steroids for the treatment of people with RRMS.

SEARCH METHODS

CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers were searched on 21 September 2021 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. A top-up search was conducted on 8 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that studied one or more of the available immunomodulators and immunosuppressants as monotherapy in comparison to placebo or to another active agent, in adults with RRMS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We considered both direct and indirect evidence and performed data synthesis by pairwise and network meta-analysis. Certainty of the evidence was assessed by the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 50 studies involving 36,541 participants (68.6% female and 31.4% male). Median treatment duration was 24 months, and 25 (50%) studies were placebo-controlled. Considering the risk of bias, the most frequent concern was related to the role of the sponsor in the authorship of the study report or in data management and analysis, for which we judged 68% of the studies were at high risk of other bias. The other frequent concerns were performance bias (34% judged as having high risk) and attrition bias (32% judged as having high risk). Placebo was used as the common comparator for network analysis. Relapses over 12 months: data were provided in 18 studies (9310 participants). Natalizumab results in a large reduction of people with relapses at 12 months (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.63; high-certainty evidence). Fingolimod (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.57; moderate-certainty evidence), daclizumab (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73; moderate-certainty evidence), and immunoglobulins (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.79; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a large reduction of people with relapses at 12 months. Relapses over 24 months: data were reported in 28 studies (19,869 participants). Cladribine (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.64; high-certainty evidence), alemtuzumab (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.68; high-certainty evidence) and natalizumab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.65; high-certainty evidence) result in a large decrease of people with relapses at 24 months. Fingolimod (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.60; moderate-certainty evidence), dimethyl fumarate (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.70; moderate-certainty evidence), and ponesimod (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.70; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a large decrease of people with relapses at 24 months. Glatiramer acetate (RR 0.84, 95%, CI 0.76 to 0.93; moderate-certainty evidence) and interferon beta-1a (Avonex, Rebif) (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.91; moderate-certainty evidence) probably moderately decrease people with relapses at 24 months. Relapses over 36 months findings were available from five studies (3087 participants). None of the treatments assessed showed moderate- or high-certainty evidence compared to placebo. Disability worsening over 24 months was assessed in 31 studies (24,303 participants). Natalizumab probably results in a large reduction of disability worsening (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.75; moderate-certainty evidence) at 24 months. Disability worsening over 36 months was assessed in three studies (2684 participants) but none of the studies used placebo as the comparator. Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events data were available from 43 studies (35,410 participants). Alemtuzumab probably results in a slight reduction of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.79; moderate-certainty evidence). Daclizumab (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.40 to 4.63; moderate-certainty evidence), fingolimod (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.57; moderate-certainty evidence), teriflunomide (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.79; moderate-certainty evidence), interferon beta-1a (OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.20; moderate-certainty evidence), laquinimod (OR 1.49, 95 % CI 1.00 to 2.15; moderate-certainty evidence), natalizumab (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.05), and glatiramer acetate (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.14; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a slight increase in the number of people who discontinue treatment due to adverse events. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in 35 studies (33,998 participants). There was probably a trivial reduction in SAEs amongst people with RRMS treated with interferon beta-1b as compared to placebo (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.54; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are highly confident that, compared to placebo, two-year treatment with natalizumab, cladribine, or alemtuzumab decreases relapses more than with other DMTs. We are moderately confident that a two-year treatment with natalizumab may slow disability progression. Compared to those on placebo, people with RRMS treated with most of the assessed DMTs showed a higher frequency of treatment discontinuation due to AEs: we are moderately confident that this could happen with fingolimod, teriflunomide, interferon beta-1a, laquinimod, natalizumab and daclizumab, while our certainty with other DMTs is lower. We are also moderately certain that treatment with alemtuzumab is associated with fewer discontinuations due to adverse events than placebo, and moderately certain that interferon beta-1b probably results in a slight reduction in people who experience serious adverse events, but our certainty with regard to other DMTs is lower. Insufficient evidence is available to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DMTs in a longer term than two years, and this is a relevant issue for a chronic condition like MS that develops over decades. More than half of the included studies were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and this may have influenced their results. Further studies should focus on direct comparison between active agents, with follow-up of at least three years, and assess other patient-relevant outcomes, such as quality of life and cognitive status, with particular focus on the impact of sex/gender on treatment effects.

Disease Modifying Strategies in Multiple Sclerosis: New Rays of Hope to Combat Disability?

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is the most prevalent chronic autoimmune inflammatory- demyelinating disorder of the central nervous system (CNS). It usually begins in young adulthood, mainly between the second and fourth decades of life. Usually, the clinical course is characterized by the involvement of multiple CNS functional systems and by different, often overlapping phenotypes. In the last decades, remarkable results have been achieved in the treatment of MS, particularly in the relapsing- remitting (RRMS) form, thus improving the long-term outcome for many patients. As deeper knowledge of MS pathogenesis and respective molecular targets keeps growing, nowadays, several lines of disease-modifying treatments (DMT) are available, an impressive change compared to the relative poverty of options available in the past. Current MS management by DMTs is aimed at reducing relapse frequency, ameliorating symptoms, and preventing clinical disability and progression. Notwithstanding the relevant increase in pharmacological options for the management of RRMS, research is now increasingly pointing to identify new molecules with high efficacy, particularly in progressive forms. Hence, future efforts should be concentrated on achieving a more extensive, if not exhaustive, understanding of the pathogenetic mechanisms underlying this phase of the disease in order to characterize novel molecules for therapeutic intervention. The purpose of this review is to provide a compact overview of the numerous currently approved treatments and future innovative approaches, including neuroprotective treatments as anti-LINGO-1 monoclonal antibody and cell therapies, for effective and safe management of MS, potentially leading to a cure for this disease.

Adverse effects of immunotherapies for multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease of the central nervous system that affects mainly young adults (two to three times more frequently in women than in men) and causes significant disability after onset. Although it is accepted that immunotherapies for people with MS decrease disease activity, uncertainty regarding their relative safety remains.

OBJECTIVES

To compare adverse effects of immunotherapies for people with MS or clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), and to rank these treatments according to their relative risks of adverse effects through network meta-analyses (NMAs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, two other databases and trials registers up to March 2022, together with reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included participants 18 years of age or older with a diagnosis of MS or CIS, according to any accepted diagnostic criteria, who were included in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined one or more of the agents used in MS or CIS, and compared them versus placebo or another active agent. We excluded RCTs in which a drug regimen was compared with a different regimen of the same drug without another active agent or placebo as a control arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods for data extraction and pairwise meta-analyses. For NMAs, we used the netmeta suite of commands in R to fit random-effects NMAs assuming a common between-study variance. We used the CINeMA platform to GRADE the certainty of the body of evidence in NMAs. We considered a relative risk (RR) of 1.5 as a non-inferiority safety threshold compared to placebo. We assessed the certainty of evidence for primary outcomes within the NMA according to GRADE, as very low, low, moderate or high.

MAIN RESULTS

This NMA included 123 trials with 57,682 participants. Serious adverse events (SAEs) Reporting of SAEs was available from 84 studies including 5696 (11%) events in 51,833 (89.9%) participants out of 57,682 participants in all studies. Based on the absolute frequency of SAEs, our non-inferiority threshold (up to a 50% increased risk) meant that no more than 1 in 18 additional people would have a SAE compared to placebo. Low-certainty evidence suggested that three drugs may decrease SAEs compared to placebo (relative risk [RR], 95% confidence interval [CI]): interferon beta-1a (Avonex) (0.78, 0.66 to 0.94); dimethyl fumarate (0.79, 0.67 to 0.93), and glatiramer acetate (0.84, 0.72 to 0.98). Several drugs met our non-inferiority criterion versus placebo: moderate-certainty evidence for teriflunomide (1.08, 0.88 to 1.31); low-certainty evidence for ocrelizumab (0.85, 0.67 to 1.07), ozanimod (0.88, 0.59 to 1.33), interferon beta-1b (0.94, 0.78 to 1.12), interferon beta-1a (Rebif) (0.96, 0.80 to 1.15), natalizumab (0.97, 0.79 to 1.19), fingolimod (1.05, 0.92 to 1.20) and laquinimod (1.06, 0.83 to 1.34); very low-certainty evidence for daclizumab (0.83, 0.68 to 1.02). Non-inferiority with placebo was not met due to imprecision for the other drugs: low-certainty evidence for cladribine (1.10, 0.79 to 1.52), siponimod (1.20, 0.95 to 1.51), ofatumumab (1.26, 0.88 to 1.79) and rituximab (1.01, 0.67 to 1.52); very low-certainty evidence for immunoglobulins (1.05, 0.33 to 3.32), diroximel fumarate (1.05, 0.23 to 4.69), peg-interferon beta-1a (1.07, 0.66 to 1.74), alemtuzumab (1.16, 0.85 to 1.60), interferons (1.62, 0.21 to 12.72) and azathioprine (3.62, 0.76 to 17.19). Withdrawals due to adverse events Reporting of withdrawals due to AEs was available from 105 studies (85.4%) including 3537 (6.39%) events in 55,320 (95.9%) patients out of 57,682 patients in all studies. Based on the absolute frequency of withdrawals, our non-inferiority threshold (up to a 50% increased risk) meant that no more than 1 in 31 additional people would withdraw compared to placebo. No drug reduced withdrawals due to adverse events when compared with placebo. There was very low-certainty evidence (meaning that estimates are not reliable) that two drugs met our non-inferiority criterion versus placebo, assuming an upper 95% CI RR limit of 1.5: diroximel fumarate (0.38, 0.11 to 1.27) and alemtuzumab (0.63, 0.33 to 1.19). Non-inferiority with placebo was not met due to imprecision for the following drugs: low-certainty evidence for ofatumumab (1.50, 0.87 to 2.59); very low-certainty evidence for methotrexate (0.94, 0.02 to 46.70), corticosteroids (1.05, 0.16 to 7.14), ozanimod (1.06, 0.58 to 1.93), natalizumab (1.20, 0.77 to 1.85), ocrelizumab (1.32, 0.81 to 2.14), dimethyl fumarate (1.34, 0.96 to 1.86), siponimod (1.63, 0.96 to 2.79), rituximab (1.63, 0.53 to 5.00), cladribine (1.80, 0.89 to 3.62), mitoxantrone (2.11, 0.50 to 8.87), interferons (3.47, 0.95 to 12.72), and cyclophosphamide (3.86, 0.45 to 33.50). Eleven drugs may have increased withdrawals due to adverse events compared with placebo: low-certainty evidence for teriflunomide (1.37, 1.01 to 1.85), glatiramer acetate (1.76, 1.36 to 2.26), fingolimod (1.79, 1.40 to 2.28), interferon beta-1a (Rebif) (2.15, 1.58 to 2.93), daclizumab (2.19, 1.31 to 3.65) and interferon beta-1b (2.59, 1.87 to 3.77); very low-certainty evidence for laquinimod (1.42, 1.01 to 2.00), interferon beta-1a (Avonex) (1.54, 1.13 to 2.10), immunoglobulins (1.87, 1.01 to 3.45), peg-interferon beta-1a (3.46, 1.44 to 8.33) and azathioprine (6.95, 2.57 to 18.78); however, very low-certainty evidence is unreliable. Sensitivity analyses including only studies with low attrition bias, drug dose above the group median, or only patients with relapsing remitting MS or CIS, and subgroup analyses by prior disease-modifying treatments did not change these figures. Rankings No drug yielded consistent P scores in the upper quartile of the probability of being better than others for primary and secondary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found mostly low and very low-certainty evidence that drugs used to treat MS may not increase SAEs, but may increase withdrawals compared with placebo. The results suggest that there is no important difference in the occurrence of SAEs between first- and second-line drugs and between oral, injectable, or infused drugs, compared with placebo. Our review, along with other work in the literature, confirms poor-quality reporting of adverse events from RCTs of interventions. At the least, future studies should follow the CONSORT recommendations about reporting harm-related issues. To address adverse effects, future systematic reviews should also include non-randomized studies.

A Real-World Experience of Azathioprine Versus First-Line Disease-Modifying Therapy in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis-A Prospective Cohort Study

Azathioprine (AZA) has demonstrated efficacy in multiple randomized control trials (RCTs) for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS). However, we still need comparative real-world data with other first-line disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). We aimed to assess AZA's effectiveness regarding relapses, disability progression, time to the first relapse, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity, and safety compared with other approved first-line DMTs in an Indian population in a real-world setting. We conducted a single-center prospective study of treatment-naive RRMS patients between 2017 and 2019. We evaluated the effects of AZA and other approved DMTs on clinical and radiological measures. Among 192 eligible patients (F:M ratio 2.84:1), 68 patients (35.4%) were on AZA, 68 patients (35.4%) were on dimethyl fumarate (DMF), 32 patients (16.7%) on interferon (IFN beta-1a), and 16 patients (8.3%) on teriflunomide (TFL). Four treatment groups were comparable: AZA v/s DMF v/s TFL v/s IFN beta-1a. In primary outcomes, there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of change in the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score at three months (p-value = 0.169), six months (p-value = 0.303), 12 months (p-value = 0.082), and 24 months (p-value = 0.639), the number of relapses (p-value = 0.229), and time to the first relapse (p-value > 0.05 in all groups). In the secondary outcome, there was no significant difference between the treatment groups on serial MRI parameters used according to "Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis" (MAGNIMS) 2016 criteria (p-value > 0.05). In safety outcomes, leukopenia was significantly more common in the AZA group (p-value = 0.025), flu-like symptoms (p-value = 0.0001), and injection site reactions (p-value = 0.035) were significantly more common in the IFN beta-1a group. Our study suggests AZA is as effective as other approved DMTs and a good alternative as a first-line treatment for multiple sclerosis's clinical and radiological activity in real-world settings on short follow-up. Based on these results, more randomized controlled trials of AZA v/s DMF or other DMTs are needed for more robust outcomes.

Multiple sclerosis: disease modifying therapy and the human leukocyte antigen

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the potential relationship between the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) type (class I and II) and the response to several disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).

METHODS

We analyzed clinical data of 87 patients with MS at the beginning and end of each type of DMT including the disease duration, Expanded Disability Status Scale and Multiple Sclerosis Severity Score (MSSS). Genotyping of HLA-DRB1, HLA-DPB1, HLA-DQB1, HLA-A, HLA-B and HLA-C alleles were identified using high-resolution techniques. Statistical correlation between the HLA type and response to DMTs was done using the initial and final MSSS.

RESULTS

Statistical relationships (p < 0.05) were found for only 15 of 245 alleles tested. There was a reduction in the MSSS for patients treated with corticosteroids (DRB1*15:01, DPB1*04:01, DQB1*02:01 and DQB1*03:01), azathioprine (DRB1*03:01, DPB1*04:01, DQB1*03:02, DQB1*06:02, HLA-C*07:02), interferon β-1a 22 mcg (DRB1*11:04, DQB1*03:01 and DQB1*03:02), interferon β-1a 30 mcg (DPB1*02:01, HLA-C*05:01) and interferon β-1b (DQB1*02:01).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest a few relationships between the HLA and response to DMTs in the disability for some types of HLA class I and II alleles in a specific subset of MS patients.

Achillea millefolium is beneficial as an add-on therapy in patients with multiple sclerosis: A randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a neurological disease for which to date there is no cure and the existing disease-modifying drugs just slow down the disease progression.

PURPOSE

In this clinical trial we evaluated the efficacy of Achillea millefolium (A. millefolium) aqueous extract in MS patients.

METHODS

A triple-blind randomized placebo-controlled parallel group trial was conducted on 75 MS patients. The patients were randomized into three groups including placebo and two groups receiving A. millefolium with two different doses, i.e. 250  mg/day and 500  mg/day, for 1 year. The primary outcome was the annualized relapse rate. Also, number and volume of lesions were obtained from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. Furthermore, we performed a comprehensive neurological and cognitive tests as follows: changes in the expanded disability status scale (EDSS), the multiple sclerosis functional composite (MSFC), fatigue severity scale (FSS), Ashworth spasticity assessment, Beck depression test, State-trait anxiety inventory (STAI), mini-mental status examination (MMSE), Wisconsin card sorting test (WCST), tower of London test (TOL), word-pair learning, paced auditory serial addition task (PASAT) and standard laboratory tests.

RESULTS

This study showed one year administration of A. millefolium (both doses) decreased the annual relapse rate in MS patients. The mean volume change of lesions significantly decreased in the 500 mg A. millefolium group. The add-on therapy also increased time to first relapse and the MSFC z-score; it decreased the EDSS score and improved performance in word-pair learning, PASAT, and WCST.

CONCLUSION

We found beneficial effects of A. millefolium aqueous extract as an add-on therapy in MS patients.

Polyomavirus detection in multiple sclerosis patients under natalizumab therapy: Profile and frequency of urinary shedding

Patients undergoing Natalizumab (NTZ) therapy are at risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). Besides John Cunningham virus (JCV), BK polyomavirus might represent an additional concern for such patients since it can also infect CNS cells. Currently, data regarding the presence of anti-JCV antibodies added to previous immunosuppressive therapy and prolonged NTZ therapy has been used to classify patients at risk of developing PML. Here, we investigated the profile shedding of JCV and BKV in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients during treatment with NTZ. Serial blood and urine samples from 97 MS patients receiving either NTZ or β-interferon were investigated for polyomavirus shedding. While all blood samples tested negative, 36% of the patients shed polyomavirus in the urine in at least one time point. From these, 21.7%, 9.3%, and 5.1% shed JCV, BKV, and both polyomavirus, respectively. No difference was observed between the rates of urinary shedding of patients treated with NTZ (38.9%) and patients treated with other drugs (34.5%), also no PML event was diagnosed during the follow-up. Therefore, urinary shedding might not be interfered by therapy condition. In our study, we also observed 14/27 (52%) of anti-JCV antibodies prevalence, and nearly half of them (42%) did not present any event of urinary shedding during the follow-up. J. Med. Virol. 89:528-534, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different therapeutic strategies are available for the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), including immunomodulators, immunosuppressants and biologics. Although there is consensus that these therapies reduce the frequency of relapses, their relative benefit in delaying new relapses or disability worsening remains unclear due to the limited number of direct comparison trials.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefit and acceptability of interferon beta-1b, interferon beta-1a (Avonex, Rebif), glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab, pegylated interferon beta-1a, daclizumab, laquinimod, azathioprine and immunoglobulins for the treatment of people with RRMS and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefit and acceptability, defined as the proportion of participants who withdrew due to any adverse event.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group Trials Register, which contains trials from CENTRAL (2014, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to 2014), EMBASE (1974 to 2014), CINAHL (1981 to 2014), LILACS (1982 to 2014), clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO trials registry, and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports. We ran the most recent search in September 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that studied one or more of the 15 treatments as monotherapy, compared to placebo or to another active agent, for use in adults with RRMS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified studies from the search results and performed data extraction. We performed data synthesis by pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis. We assessed the quality of the body of evidence for outcomes within the network meta-analysis according to GRADE, as very low, low, moderate or high.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 39 studies in this review, in which 25,113 participants were randomised. The majority of the included trials were short-term studies, with a median duration of 24 months. Twenty-four (60%) were placebo-controlled and 15 (40%) were head-to-head studies.Network meta-analysis showed that, in terms of a protective effect against the recurrence of relapses in RRMS during the first 24 months of treatment, alemtuzumab, mitoxantrone, natalizumab, and fingolimod outperformed other drugs. The most effective drug was alemtuzumab (risk ratio (RR) versus placebo 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.55; surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) 96%; moderate quality evidence), followed by mitoxantrone (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.81; SUCRA 92%; very low quality evidence), natalizumab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.66; SUCRA 88%; high quality evidence), and fingolimod (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.81; SUCRA 71%; moderate quality evidence).Disability worsening was based on a surrogate marker, defined as irreversible worsening confirmed at three-month follow-up, measured during the first 24 months in the majority of included studies. Both direct and indirect comparisons revealed that the most effective treatments were mitoxantrone (RR versus placebo 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.84; SUCRA 96%; low quality evidence), alemtuzumab (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.48; SUCRA 94%; low quality evidence), and natalizumab (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.85; SUCRA 74%; moderate quality evidence).Almost all of the agents included in this review were associated with a higher proportion of participants who withdrew due to any adverse event compared to placebo. Based on the network meta-analysis methodology, the corresponding RR estimates versus placebo over the first 24 months of follow-up were: mitoxantrone 9.92 (95% CI 0.54 to 168.84), fingolimod 1.69 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.17), natalizumab 1.53 (95% CI 0.93 to 2.53), and alemtuzumab 0.72 (95% CI 0.32 to 1.61).Information on serious adverse events (SAEs) was scanty, characterised by heterogeneous results and based on a very low number of events observed during the short-term duration of the trials included in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Conservative interpretation of these results is warranted, since most of the included treatments have been evaluated in few trials. The GRADE approach recommends providing implications for practice based on moderate to high quality evidence. Our review shows that alemtuzumab, natalizumab, and fingolimod are the best choices for preventing clinical relapses in people with RRMS, but this evidence is limited to the first 24 months of follow-up. For the prevention of disability worsening in the short term (24 months), only natalizumab shows a beneficial effect on the basis of moderate quality evidence (all of the other estimates were based on low to very low quality evidence). Currently, therefore, insufficient evidence is available to evaluate treatments for the prevention of irreversible disability worsening.There are two additional major concerns that have to be considered. First, the benefit of all of these treatments beyond two years is uncertain and this is a relevant issue for a disease with a duration of 30 to 40 years. Second, short-term trials provide scanty and poorly reported safety data and do not provide useful evidence in order to obtain a reliable risk profile of treatments. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will be necessary also to evaluate non-randomised studies and post-marketing reports released from the regulatory agencies. Finally, more than 70% of the studies included in this review were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and this may have influenced the results.There are three needs that the research agenda should address. First, randomised trials of direct comparisons between active agents would be useful, avoiding further placebo-controlled studies. Second, follow-up of the original trial cohorts should be mandatory. Third, more studies are needed to assess the medium and long-term benefit and safety of immunotherapies and the comparative safety of different agents.

Azathioprine versus beta interferons for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial

For almost three decades in many countries azathioprine has been used to treat relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. However its efficacy was usually considered marginal and following approval of β interferons for this indication it was no longer recommended as first line treatment, even if presently no conclusive direct β interferon-azathioprine comparison exists. To compare azathioprine efficacy versus the currently available β interferons in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, a multicenter, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, non-inferiority trial was conducted in 30 Italian multiple sclerosis centers. Eligible patients (relapsing-remitting course; ≥ 2 relapses in the last 2 years) were randomly assigned to azathioprine or β interferons. The primary outcome was annualized relapse rate ratio (RR) over 2 years. Key secondary outcome was number of new brain MRI lesions. Patients (n = 150) were randomized in 2 groups (77 azathioprine, 73 β interferons). At 2 years, clinical evaluation was completed in 127 patients (62 azathioprine, 65 β interferons). Annualized relapse rate was 0.26 (95% Confidence Interval, CI, 0.19-0.37) in the azathioprine and 0.39 (95% CI 0.30-0.51) in the interferon group. Non-inferiority analysis showed that azathioprine was at least as effective as β interferons (relapse RRAZA/IFN 0.67, one-sided 95% CI 0.96; p<0.01). MRI outcomes were analyzed in 97 patients (50 azathioprine and 47 β interferons). Annualized new T2 lesion rate was 0.76 (95% CI 0.61-0.95) in the azathioprine and 0.69 (95% CI 0.54-0.88) in the interferon group. Treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were higher (20.3% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.03) in the azathioprine than in the interferon group, and concentrated within the first months of treatment, whereas in the interferon group discontinuations occurred mainly during the second year. The results of this study indicate that efficacy of azathioprine is not inferior to that of β interferons for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Considering also the convenience of the oral administration, and the low cost for health service providers, azathioprine may represent an alternative to interferon treatment, while the different side effect profiles of both medications have to be taken into account.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT 2006-004937-13.

Therapeutic strategies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a special focus on reduction of grey matter damage as measured by brain atrophy

In the past two decades, several pathological and radiological findings convincingly demonstrated that damage of the cortical and deep grey matter is a key issue in multiple sclerosis with a significant impact on physical and cognitive disability. Moreover, it has become increasingly evident that the effect of available therapies on the inflammatory white matter damage is not a guarantee of a meaningful effect on the neurodegenerative process mainly affecting the grey matter. Despite the efficacy of all approved disease-modifying drugs should be measured considering such a relevant aspect of the disease, data from clinical trials are few, scattered and heterogeneous. The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence so far acquired on the effect of reducing grey matter damage produced by current and emerging disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis.

Future of management of multiple sclerosis in the middle East: a consensus view from specialists in ten countries

The prevalence of multiple sclerosis (MS) is now considered to be medium-to-high in the Middle East and is rising, particularly among women. While the characteristics of the disease and the response of patients to disease-modifying therapies are generally comparable between the Middle East and other areas, significant barriers to achieving optimal care for MS exist in these developing nations. A group of physicians involved in the management of MS in ten Middle Eastern countries met to consider the future of MS care in the region, using a structured process to reach a consensus. Six key priorities were identified: early diagnosis and management of MS, the provision of multidisciplinary MS centres, patient engagement and better communication with stakeholders, regulatory body education and reimbursement, a commitment to research, and more therapy options with better benefit-to-risk ratios. The experts distilled these priorities into a single vision statement: "Optimization of patient-centred multidisciplinary strategies to improve the quality of life of people with MS." These core principles will contribute to the development of a broader consensus on the future of care for MS in the Middle East.

Role of immunosuppressive therapy for the treatment of multiple sclerosis

Immunosuppressives have been used in multiple sclerosis (MS) since 1966. Today, we have many treatments for the relapsing forms of the disease, including 8 US Food and Drug Administration-approved therapies, with more soon to be introduced. Given the current treatment landscape what place do immunosuppressants have in combating MS? Trial work and our experience suggest that immunosuppressives still have an important role in treating MS. Cyclophosphamide finds use in treating patients with severe, inflammatory relapsing remitting MS or those suffering from a fulminant attack. We tend to employ mycophenolate mofetil as an add-on to injectable therapy for patients experiencing breakthrough activity. Some progressive (primary progressive multiple sclerosis or secondary progressive multiple sclerosis) patients may stabilize after treatment with either cyclophosphamide or mycophenolate. We rarely employ mitoxantrone because of potential cardiac or carcinogenic effects. We prefer to use cyclophosphamide or mycophenolate mofetil in preference to methotrexate because evidence of efficacy is limited for this drug. We have less experience with azathioprine, but it may be an alternative for patients with limited options who are unable to tolerate conventional therapies.

Latin American algorithm for treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis using disease-modifying agents

OBJECTIVE

It is estimated that circa 50,000 individuals have relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Latin America. European and North-American algorithms for the treatment of multiple sclerosis do not foresee our regional difficulties and the access of patients to treatment.

METHODS

The Latin American Multiple Sclerosis Forum is an independent and supra-institutional group of experts that has assessed the latest scientific evidence regarding efficacy and safety of disease-modifying treatments. Accesses to treatment and pharmacovigilance programs for each of the eight countries represented at the Forum were also analyzed.

RESULTS

A specific set of guidelines based upon evidence-based recommendations was designed for Latin America. Future perspectives of multiple sclerosis treatment were also discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

The present paper translated an effort from representatives of eight countries discussing a matter that cannot be adapted to our region directly from purely European and North-American guidelines for treatment.

Large pipeline and new safety issues likely to change 1st line recommendations for multiple sclerosis

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is chronic neurodegenerative disorder which can result in significant morbidity. Currently, there are not evidence-based guidelines for the choice of which first-line agent to start with, when to switch, or what to switch to, when treating MS. This review article discusses recent changes related to the treatment of MS and reviews disease modifying therapies in the pipeline for treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

Systematic review of disease-modifying therapies to assess unmet needs in multiple sclerosis: tolerability and adherence

Reviews of therapeutic drugs usually focus on the highly selected and closely monitored patient populations from randomized controlled trials. The objective of this study was to review systematically the tolerability and adherence of multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapies, using data from both randomized controlled trials and observational settings. Relevant literature was identified using predefined search terms, and adverse event and study discontinuation data were extracted and categorized according to study type (randomized controlled trial or observational) and study duration. A total of 151 papers were selected for analysis; 33% were classified as randomized controlled trials and 62% as observational studies. Most of the papers concerned interferon preparations and glatiramer acetate; the limited available information on mitoxantrone and natalizumab precluded extensive examination of these. The most common adverse events were flu-like symptoms (interferon therapies only) and injection-site reactions. Mean discontinuation rates ranged from 16% to 27%. There were no marked differences in tolerability or adherence data from randomized controlled trials and observational studies, but the incidence of adverse events remained high in lengthy studies and discontinuations accumulated with time. The present systematic review of randomized clinical trial and observational data highlights the tolerability and adherence issues associated with commonly used first-line multiple sclerosis treatments.

Chemotherapeutics in the treatment of multiple sclerosis

The likely pathogenic mechanisms of multiple sclerosis (MS) provide a sound rationale for investigating the efficacy of drugs possessing immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory properties. With proven efficacy, safety and tolerability, interferon beta formulations and glatiramer acetate have become the mainstay of initial treatment for patients with relapsing forms of MS. More recently, natalizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb) against the cellular adhesion molecule α4-integrin, has been employed for patients with an inadequate response or lack of tolerability to an alternate MS therapy, or as initial therapy for patients with severe disease. Various agents initially developed for oncological indications, either as chemotherapeutics or mAbs, may also have current or future uses in MS treatment. Mitoxantrone is currently the only chemotherapeutic agent approved for treatment of MS in the United States, while in parts of Europe azathioprine is approved and widely used for MS treatment. Other chemotherapeutics that have been tested in MS to date include cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, cladribine, and the mAbs alemtuzumab and rituximab. While there has been varying evidence of efficacy for these compounds, each appears to be associated with serious risks that require careful consideration and management. Given the risks that have been demonstrated for available chemotherapeutic agents and while long-term postmarketing safety data are still not available for those agents in development, it seems prudent to carefully assess the possible use of chemotherapeutics in the treatment of MS. A thorough risk-benefit analysis is becoming increasingly important in the assessment of therapeutic options for this disabling disease.

[Oral cladribine for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: another purine analogue or a genuine therapeutic innovation?]

Azathioprine (AZA) is a purine analogue which has been used in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) for over 30 years. After the approval of immunomodulatory drugs, such as recombinant interferon beta and glatiramer acetate, AZA now only plays a minor role in MS therapy. The results of a recently published phase III trial (CLARITY trial) involving an oral formulation of the purine analogue cladribine, a substance which is at least structurally related to AZA, may soon lead to the approval of cladribine tablets as a new oral MS therapeutic. The following overview provides a comparison of the mode of action, side-effect profile and data currently available on AZA and cladribine in the treatment of MS.

Randomized study of interferon beta-1a, low-dose azathioprine, and low-dose corticosteroids in multiple sclerosis

Background

Studies evaluating interferon beta (IFNβ) for multiple sclerosis (MS) showed only partial efficacy. In many patients, IFNβ does not halt relapses or disability progression. One strategy to potentially enhance efficacy is to combine IFNβ with classical immunosuppressive agents, such as azathioprine (AZA) or corticosteroids, commonly used for other autoimmune disorders.

Objective

The Avonex–Steroids–Azathioprine study was placebo-controlled trial and evaluated efficacy of IFNβ-1a alone and combined with low-dose AZA alone or low-dose AZA and low-dose corticosteroids as initial therapy.

Methods

A total of 181 patients with relapsing–remitting MS (RRMS) were randomized to receive IFNβ-1a 30 μg intramuscularly (IM) once weekly, IFNβ-1a 30 μg IM once weekly plus AZA 50 mg orally once daily, or IFNβ-1a 30 μg IM once weekly plus AZA 50 mg orally once daily plus prednisone 10 mg orally every other day. The primary end point was annualized relapse rate (ARR) at 2 years. Patients were eligible for enrollment in a 3-year extension.

Results

At 2 years, adjusted ARR was 1.05 for IFNβ-1a, 0.91 for IFNβ-1a plus AZA, and 0.73 for combination. The cumulative probability of sustained disability progression was 16.8% for IFNβ-1a, 20.7% for IFNβ-1a plus AZA, and 17.5% for combination. There were no statistically significant differences among groups for either measure at 2 and 5 years. Percent T2 lesion volume change at 2 years was significantly lower for combination (+14.5%) versus IFNβ-1a alone (+30.3%, P < 0.05). Groups had similar safety profiles.

Conclusion

In IFNβ-naïve patients with early active RRMS, combination treatment did not show superiority over IFNβ-1a monotherapy.