Discontinuation and dose reduction of rituximab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

De-escalation of Disease-Modifying Therapy for People with Multiple Sclerosis Due to Safety Considerations: Characterizing 1-Year Outcomes in 25 People Who Switched from Ocrelizumab to Diroximel Fumarate

INTRODUCTION

Switching disease-modifying therapy (DMT) may be considered for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) if a patient's current therapy is no longer optimal. This was particularly important during the recent COVID-19 pandemic because of considerations around immune deficiency and impaired vaccine response associated with B cell-depleting DMTs. This real-world, single-center study aimed to evaluate change or decline in functional ability and overall disease stability in people with RRMS who were switched from B cell-depleting ocrelizumab (OCRE) to diroximel fumarate (DRF) because of safety concern related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Adults with RRMS were included if they had been clinically stable for ≥ 1 year on OCRE. Data collected at baseline and 1 year post switch included relapse rate, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), blood work for assessment of peripheral immune parameters, the Cognitive Assessment Battery (CAB), optical coherence tomography (OCT), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

RESULTS

Participants (N = 25) had a mean (SD) age of 52 (9) years, and a mean (SD) duration of 26 (8) months' treatment with OCRE before the switch to DRF. Median washout duration since the last OCRE infusion was 7 months (range 4-18 months). No participants relapsed on DRF during follow-up, and all remained persistent on DRF after 1 year. There were no significant changes in peripheral immune parameters, other than an increase in the percentage of CD19+ cells 1 year after switching (p < 0.05). Similarly, there were no significant changes in CAB, OCT, and PROs.

CONCLUSION

These preliminary findings suggest that transition to DRF from OCRE may be an effective treatment option for people with RRMS who are clinically stable but may need to switch for reasons unrelated to effectiveness. Longer follow-up times on larger samples are needed to confirm these observations.

Hypogammaglobulinaemia during rituximab treatment in multiple sclerosis: A Swedish cohort study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Mechanisms behind hypogammaglobulinaemia during rituximab treatment are poorly understood.

METHODS

In this register-based multi-centre retrospective cohort study of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients in Sweden, 2745 patients from six participating Swedish MS centres were identified via the Swedish MS registry and included between 14 March 2008 and 25 January 2021. The exposure was treatment with at least one dose of rituximab for MS or clinically isolated syndrome, including data on treatment duration and doses. The degree of yearly decrease in immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) levels was evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean decrease in IgG was 0.27 (95% confidence interval 0.17-0.36) g/L per year on rituximab treatment, slightly less in older patients, and without significant difference between sexes. IgG or IgM below the lower limit of normal (<6.7 or <0.27 g/L) was observed in 8.8% and 8.3% of patients, respectively, as nadir measurements. Six out of 2745 patients (0.2%) developed severe hypogammaglobulinaemia (IgG below 4.0 g/L) during the study period. Time on rituximab and accumulated dose were the main predictors for IgG decrease. Previous treatment with fingolimod and natalizumab, but not teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, interferons or glatiramer acetate, were significantly associated with lower baseline IgG levels by 0.80-1.03 g/L, compared with treatment-naïve patients. Switching from dimethyl fumarate or interferons was associated with an additional IgG decline of 0.14-0.19 g/L per year, compared to untreated.

CONCLUSIONS

Accumulated dose and time on rituximab treatment are associated with a modest but significant decline in immunoglobulin levels. Previous MS therapies may influence additional IgG decline.

De-escalation and Discontinuation of Disease-Modifying Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Long-term use of multiple sclerosis (MS) disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) is standard practice to prevent accumulation of disability. Immunosenescence and other age-related changes lead to an altered risk-benefit ratio for older patients on DMTs. This article reviews recent research on the topic of de-escalation and discontinuation of MS DMTs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Observational and interventional studies have shed light on what happens to patients who de-escalate or discontinue DMTs and the factors, such as age, treatment type, and presence of recent disease activity, that influence outcomes. Though many questions remain, recent findings have been valuable for the development of an evidence-based approach to making de-escalation and discontinuation decisions in MS.

Planned dose reduction of ocrelizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a single-centre observational study

Background

Ocrelizumab, a humanised anti-CD20 monoclonal, is a highly effective treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). The long-term safety of B-cell depletion in RRMS, however, is uncertain and there are no data on dose reduction of ocrelizumab as a risk mitigation strategy. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of reducing ocrelizumab dose from 600 to 300 mg in patients with RRMS.

Method

Data were collected through the Townsville neurology service. Following the standard randomised controlled trial regimen of 600 mg every 6 months for 2 years, sequential patients consented to dose reduction to 300 mg every 6 months. Patients were included if they were diagnosed with RRMS and received at least one reduced dose of ocrelizumab. Relapse, disability progression, new MRI lesions, CD19+ cell counts and immunoglobulin concentrations were analysed.

Results

A total of 35 patients, treated with 177 full and 107 reduced doses, were included. The mean follow-up on reduced dose was 17 (1-31) months. We observed no relapses or new MRI activity in the cohort receiving the reduced dose, accompanied by persistent CD19+B cell depletion (≤0.05×109/L). Mean IgG, IgA and IgM levels remained stable throughout the study. No new safety concerns arose.

Conclusions

In this single-centre observational study, dose reduction of ocrelizumab from 600 to 300 mg every 6 months after 2 years appeared to maintain efficacy in terms of new inflammatory disease activity. A randomised trial may be warranted to confirm this and explore the impact of dose reduction on long-term safety.

Impact of previous treatment history and B-cell depletion treatment duration on infection risk in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

B-cell depletion displays striking effectiveness in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), but is also associated with increased infection risk. To what degree previous treatment history, disease-modifying therapy (DMT) switching pattern and time on treatment modulate this risk is unknown. The objective here was to evaluate previous DMT use and treatment duration as predictors of infection risk with B-cell depletion.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide RRMS cohort study leveraging data from the Swedish MS registry and national demographic and health registries recording all outpatient-treated and inpatient-treated infections and antibiotics prescriptions from 1 January 2012 to 30 June 2021. The risk of infection during treatment was compared by DMT, treatment duration, number and type of prior treatment and adjusted for a number of covariates.

RESULTS

Among 4694 patients with RRMS on B-cell depletion (rituximab), 6049 on other DMTs and 20 308 age-sex matched population controls, we found higher incidence rates of inpatient-treated infections with DMTs other than rituximab used in first line (10.4; 95% CI 8.1 to 12.9, per 1000 person-years), being further increased with rituximab (22.7; 95% CI 18.5 to 27.5), compared with population controls (6.6; 95% CI 6.0 to 7.2). Similar patterns were seen for outpatient infections and antibiotics prescriptions. Infection rates on rituximab did not vary between first versus later line treatment, type of DMT before switch or exposure time.

CONCLUSION

These findings underscore an important safety concern with B-cell depletion in RRMS, being evident also in individuals with shorter disease duration and no previous DMT exposure, in turn motivating the application of risk mitigation strategies.

High-Efficacy Therapy Discontinuation vs Continuation in Patients 50 Years and Older With Nonactive MS

Importance

A recent randomized clinical trial concluded that discontinuing medium-efficacy therapy might be a reasonable option for older patients with nonactive multiple sclerosis (MS), but there is a lack of data on discontinuing high-efficacy therapy (HET). In younger patients, the discontinuation of natalizumab and fingolimod is associated with a risk of rebound of disease activity.

Objective

To determine whether discontinuing HET in patients 50 years and older with nonactive MS is associated with an increased risk of relapse compared with continuing HET.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This observational cohort study used data from 38 referral centers from the French MS registry (Observatoire Français de la Sclérose en Plaques [OFSEP] database). Among 84704 patients in the database, data were extracted for 1857 patients 50 years and older with relapsing-remitting MS treated by HET and with no relapse or magnetic resonance imaging activity for at least 2 years. After verification of the medical records, 1620 patients were classified as having discontinued HET or having remained taking treatment and were matched 1:1 using a dynamic propensity score (including age, sex, disease phenotype, disability, treatment of interest, and time since last inflammatory activity). Patients were included from February 2008 to November 2021, with a mean (SD) follow-up of 5.1 (2.9) years. Data were extracted in June 2022.

Exposures

Natalizumab, fingolimod, rituximab, and ocrelizumab.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Time to first relapse.

Results

Of 1620 included patients, 1175 (72.5%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 54.7 (4.8) years. Among the 1452 in the HET continuation group and 168 in the HET discontinuation group, 154 patients in each group were matched using propensity scores (mean [SD] age, 57.7 [5.5] years; mean [SD] delay since the last inflammatory activity, 5.6 [3.8] years; mean [SD] follow-up duration after propensity score matching, 2.5 [2.1] years). Time to first relapse was significantly reduced in the HET discontinuation group compared with the HET continuation group (hazard ratio, 4.1; 95% CI, 2.0-8.5; P < .001) but differed between HETs, with a hazard ratio of 7.2 (95% CI, 2.1-24.5; P = .001) for natalizumab, 4.5 (95% CI, 1.3-15.5; P = .02) for fingolimod, and 1.1 (95% CI, 0.3-4.8; P = .85) for anti-CD20 therapy.

Conclusion and Relevance

As in younger patients, in patients 50 years and older with nonactive MS, the risk of relapse increased significantly after stopping HETs that impact immune cell trafficking (natalizumab and fingolimod). There was no significant increase in risk after stopping HETs that deplete B-cells (anti-CD20 therapy). This result may inform decisions about stopping HETs in clinical practice.

Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in multiple sclerosis: Rethinking the current treatment strategy

Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies are highly-effective B-cell-depleting therapies in multiple sclerosis (MS). These treatments have expanded the arsenal of highly effective disease-modifying therapies, and have changed the landscape in understanding the pathophysiology of MS and the natural course of the disease. Nevertheless, these treatments come at the cost of immunosuppression and risk of serious infections, diminished vaccination response and treatment-related secondary hypogammaglobulinemia. However, the COVID pandemic has given way to a possibility of readapting these therapies, with most notably extended dosing intervals. While these new strategies show efficacy in maintaining inflammatory MS disease control, and although it is tempting to speculate that tailoring CD20 therapies will reduce the negative outcomes of long-term immunosuppression, it is unknown whether they provide meaningful benefit in reducing the risk of treatment-related secondary hypogammaglobulinemia and serious infections. This review highlights the available anti-CD20 therapies that are available for treating MS patients, and sheds light on encouraging data, which propose that tailoring anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies is the next step in rethinking the current treatment strategy.

Drugs Targeting CD20 in Multiple Sclerosis: Pharmacology, Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability

Currently, there are four monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target the cluster of differentiation (CD) 20 receptor available to treat multiple sclerosis (MS): rituximab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, and ublituximab. B-cell depletion therapy has changed the therapeutic landscape of MS through robust efficacy on clinical manifestations and MRI lesion activity, and the currently available anti-CD20 mAb therapies for use in MS are a cornerstone of highly effective disease-modifying treatment. Ocrelizumab is currently the only therapy with regulatory approval for primary progressive MS. There are currently few data regarding the relative efficacy of these therapies, though several clinical trials are ongoing. Safety concerns applicable to this class of therapeutics relate primarily to immunogenicity and mechanism of action, and include infusion-related or injection-related reactions, development of hypogammaglobulinemia (leading to increased infection and malignancy risk), and decreased vaccine response. Exploration of alternative dose/dosing schedules might be an effective strategy for mitigating these risks. Future development of biosimilar medications might make these therapies more readily available. Although anti-CD20 mAb therapies have led to significant improvements in disease outcomes, CNS-penetrant therapies are still needed to more effectively address the compartmentalized inflammation thought to play an important role in disability progression.

Control of disease activity with large extended-interval dosing of rituximab/ocrelizumab in highly active pediatric multiple sclerosis

Recent studies in adults suggested that extended-interval dosing of rituximab/ocrelizumab (RTX/OCR) larger than 12 months was safe and could improve safety. This was an observational cohort study of very active pediatric-onset multiple sclerosis (PoMS) (median (range) age, 16 (12-17) years) treated with RTX/OCR with 6 month standard-interval dosing (n = 9) or early extended-interval dosing (n = 12, median (range) interval 18 months (12-25)). Within a median (range) follow-up of 31 (12-63) months after RTX/OCR onset, one patient (standard-interval) experienced relapse and no patient showed disability worsening or new T2-weighted lesions. This study suggests that the effectiveness of RTX/OCR is maintained with a median extended-interval dosing of 18 months in patients with very active PoMS.

Efficacy and safety of rituximab in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to synthesize all available observational studies and clinical trials of rituximab to estimate the safety and efficacy of this monoclonal antibody in people with multiple sclerosis (MS).

METHODS

The four databases including PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science were comprehensively searched in April 2022. We defined PICO as follows. Problem or study population (P): patients with MS; intervention (I): Rituximab; comparison (C): none; outcome (O): efficacy and safety.

RESULTS

After two-step screening, a total of 27 studies entered into our qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Our analysis showed a significant decrease in EDSS score in all patients with MS after treatment (SMD: - 0.44, 95% CI - 0.85, - 0.03). In addition, the ARR was reduced after using rituximab compared to the pre-treatment period (SMD: - 0.65, 95% CI - 1.55, 0.24) but it was not significant. The most common side effect after rituximab with a pooled prevalence of 28.63% (95% CI 16.61%, 42.33%). Furthermore, the pooled prevalence of infection was 24% in patients with MS (95% CI 13%, 36%). In the end, the pooled prevalence of malignancies after rituximab treatment was 0.39% (95% CI 0.02%, 1.03%).

CONCLUSION

Our findings illustrated an acceptable safety for this treatment. However, further studies with randomized design, long follow-up, and large sample sizes are needed to confirm the safety and efficacy of rituximab in patients with MS.

Assessing Sustained B-Cell Depletion and Disease Activity in a French Multiple Sclerosis Cohort Treated by Long-Term IV Anti-CD20 Antibody Therapy

Few studies have investigated sustained B-cell depletion after long-term intravenous (IV) anti-CD20 B-cell depleting therapy (BCDT) in multiple sclerosis (MS) with respect to strict and/or minimal disease activity. The main objective of this study was to investigate how sustained B-cell depletion after BCDT influences clinical and radiological stability as defined by "no evidence of disease activity" (NEDA-3) and "minimal evidence of disease activity" (MEDA) status in MS patients at 12 and 18 months. Furthermore, we assessed the frequency of serious adverse events (SAE), and the influence of prior lymphocytopenia-inducing treatment (LIT) on lymphocyte subset counts and gammaglobulins in MS patients receiving long-term BCDT. We performed a retrospective, prospectively collected, study in a cohort of 192 MS patients of all clinical phenotypes treated by BCDT between January 2014 and September 2021. Overall, 84.2% and 96.9% of patients attained NEDA-3 and MEDA status at 18 months, respectively. Sustained CD19+ depletion was observed in 85.8% of patients at 18 months. No significant difference was observed when comparing patients achieving either NEDA-3 or MEDA at 18 months and sustained B-cell depletion. Compared to baseline levels, IgM and IgG levels on BCDT significantly decreased at 6 months and 30 months, respectively. Patients receiving LIT prior to BCDT showed significant CD4+ lymphocytopenia and lower IgG levels compared to non-LIT patients. Grade 3 or above SAEs were rare. As nearly all patients achieved MEDA at 18 months, we suggest tailoring IV BCDT after 18 months given the occurrence of lymphocytopenia, hypogammaglobulinemia, and SAE after this time point.

Efficacy of Rituximab Outlasts B-Cell Repopulation in Multiple Sclerosis: Time to Rethink Dosing?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Patients with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) receiving extended dosing of rituximab (RTX) have exhibited no return of disease activity, which suggests that maintenance of deep depletion of circulating B cells is not necessary to maintain the efficacy of RTX in MS.

METHODS

This was a prospective monocentric observational study including all consecutive PwMS who started or continued RTX after 2019, when the medical staff decided to extend the dosing interval up to 24 months for all patients. Circulating B-cell subsets were monitored regularly and systematically in case of relapse. The first extended interval was analyzed.

RESULTS

We included 236 PwMS (81% with relapsing-remitting MS; mean [SD] age 43 [12] years; median [range] EDSS score 4 [0-8]; mean relapse rate during the year before RTX start 1.09 [0.99]; 41.5% with MRI activity). The median number of RTX infusions before extension was 4 (1-13). At the time of the analysis, the median delay in dosing was 17 months (8-39); the median proportion of circulating CD19+ B cells was 7% (0-25) of total lymphocytes and that of CD27+ memory B cells was 4% (0-16) of total B cells. The mean annual relapse rate did not differ before and after the extension: 0.03 (0.5) and 0.04 (0.15) (p = 0.51). Similarly, annual relapse rates did not differ before and after extension in patients with EDSS score ≤3 (n = 79) or disease duration ≤5 years (n = 71) at RTX onset. During the "extended dosing" period, MRI demonstrated no lesion accrual in 228 of the 236 patients (97%). Five patients experienced clinical relapse, which was confirmed by MRI. In these patients, the level of B-cell subset reconstitution at the time of the relapse did not differ from that for patients with the same extension window.

DISCUSSION

The efficacy of RTX outlasted substantial reconstitution of circulating B cells in PwMS, which suggests that renewal of the immune system underlies the prolonged effect of RTX in MS. These findings suggest that extended interval dosing of RTX that leads to a significant reconstitution of circulating B cells is safe in PwMS, could reduce the risk of infection, and could improve vaccine efficacy.

Disease Evolution in Women With Highly Active MS Who Suspended Natalizumab During Pregnancy vs Rituximab/Ocrelizumab Before Conception

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

In women with highly active multiple sclerosis (MS), suspending rituximab (RTX) for planning pregnancy is associated with low disease reactivation. Whether this strategy reduces the risk of disease reactivity as compared with suspending natalizumab (NTZ) 3 months after conception is unclear.

METHODS

We retrospectively included women with MS followed in our department during pregnancy and 1 year after birth who suspended NTZ at the end of the first trimester (option mostly proposed before 2016) or suspended RTX/ocrelizumab (RTX/OCR) in the year before conception (option proposed since 2016).

RESULTS

In women who suspended NTZ, 45 pregnancies resulted in 3 miscarriages and 42 live births, including 1 newborn with major malformations. In women who suspended RTX/OCR, 37 pregnancies resulted in 3 miscarriages and 33 live births; 1 pregnancy was terminated for malformation. During pregnancy, relapse occurred in 3/42 (7.1%) patients of the NTZ group and 1/33 (3%) of the RTX/OCR group (p = 0.6). After delivery, relapse occurred in 9/42 (21.4%) patients of the NTZ group and 0/33 of the RTX/OCR group (p < 0.01). In the NTZ group, 8/9 relapses occurred in patients who restarted NTZ less than 4 weeks after delivery. The proportion of patients with gadolinium-enhanced and/or new T2 lesions on brain or spinal cord MRI performed after delivery was higher in the NTZ than RTX/OCR group (14/40 [35%] vs 1/31 [3%] patients, p = 0.001), the proportion with EDSS score progression during the period including pregnancy and the year after delivery was higher (7/42 [17%] vs 0/33 patients, p = 0.01), and the proportion fulfilling NEDA-3 during this period was lower (21/40 [53%] vs 30/31 [97%] patients, p < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

Suspending RTX/OCR in the year before conception in women with highly active MS was associated with no disease reactivation during and after pregnancy. As previously reported, stopping NTZ at the end of the first trimester was associated with disease reactivation. In women receiving NTZ who are planning pregnancy, a bridge to RTX/OCR for pregnancy or continuing NTZ until week 34 are both reasonable clinical decisions. The RTX/OCR option is more comfortable for women and reduces the exposure of infants to monoclonal antibodies.

Rituximab De-escalation in Patients With Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Exit strategies such as de-escalations have not been evaluated for rituximab in patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). We hypothesized that they are associated with disease reactivations and aimed to estimate this risk.

METHODS

We describe a case series of real-world de-escalations from the French NMOSD registry (NOMADMUS). All patients met the 2015 International Panel for NMO Diagnosis (IPND) diagnostic criteria for NMOSD. A computerized screening of the registry extracted patients with rituximab de-escalations and at least 12 months of subsequent follow-up. We searched for 7 de-escalation regimens: scheduled discontinuations or switches to an oral treatment after single infusion cycles, scheduled discontinuations or switches to an oral treatment after periodic infusions, de-escalations before pregnancies, de-escalations after tolerance issues, and increased infusion intervals. Rituximab discontinuations motivated by inefficacy or for unknown purposes were excluded. The primary outcome was the absolute risk of NMOSD reactivation (one or more relapses) at 12 months. AQP4+ and AQP4- serotypes were analyzed separately.

RESULTS

We identified 137 rituximab de-escalations between 2006 and 2019 that corresponded to a predefined group: 13 discontinuations after a single infusion cycle, 6 switches to an oral treatment after a single infusion cycle, 9 discontinuations after periodic infusions, 5 switches to an oral treatment after periodic infusions, 4 de-escalations before pregnancies, 9 de-escalations after tolerance issues, and 91 increased infusion intervals. No group remained relapse-free over the whole de-escalation follow-up (mean: 3.2 years; range: 0.79-9.5), except pregnancies in AQP+ patients. In all groups combined and within 12 months, reactivations occurred after 11/119 de-escalations in patients with AQP4+ NMOSD (9.2%, 95% CI [4.7-15.9]), from 0.69 to 10.0 months, and in 5/18 de-escalations in patients with AQP4- NMOSD (27.8%, 95% CI [9.7-53.5]), from 1.1 to 9.9 months.

DISCUSSION

There is a risk of NMOSD reactivation whatever the rituximab de-escalation regimen.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02850705.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class IV evidence that de-escalation of rituximab increases the probability of disease reactivation.

Current evidence of rituximab in the treatment of multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory demyelinating disorder of the central nervous system. The immunopathology of MS involves both T and B lymphocytes. Rituximab is one of the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapies which deplete B-cells. Although some anti-CD20 therapies have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of MS, rituximab is used off-label. Several studies have shown that rituximab has a good efficacy and safety in MS, including certain specific patient conditions such as treatment-naïve patients, treatment-switching patients, and the Asian population. However, there are still questions about the optimal dose and duration of rituximab in MS due to the different dosing regimens used in each study. Moreover, many biosimilars have become available at a lower cost with comparable physicochemical properties, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity. Thus, rituximab may be considered as a potential therapeutic option for patients without access to standard treatment. This narrative review summarized the evidence of both original and biosimilars of rituximab in MS treatment including pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, safety, and dosing regimen.

2 grams versus 1 gram rituximab as maintenance schedule in multiple sclerosis, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders and related diseases: What B-cell repopulation data tell us

BACKGROUND

Rituximab (RTX) is largely used as a long-term maintenance therapy in various inflammatory neurological diseases. Reducing the dose of maintenance therapy of RTX from 2 grams every 6 months (traditional regimen) to 1 gram every 6 months (reduced regimen) is a widely applied practice, with the assumption that it decreases the risk of side effects while maintaining efficacy.

METHODS

In order to better describe the biological consequences of this strategy, we retrospectively compared, in a single center, the B-cell count after the traditional regimen and after the reduced regimen in patients who underwent both (n = 161).

RESULTS

The rate of patients with B-cell repopulation was not significantly different between traditional and reduced regimens (9.9% vs 15.6%, p = 0.18). Among the 145 patients who did not have B-cell repopulation following the traditional regimen, B-cell repopulation following the reduced regimen occurred in only 16 cases (11.0%) and was usually slight: 11/16 patients had only 1% of CD19+ cells.

CONCLUSION

These data emphasize the relevance of 1 g of RTX as maintenance therapy and the fact that 2 g of RTX is generally an overtreatment in inflammatory neurological diseases.

Efficacy and safety of repeated low-dose rituximab therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: A retrospective case series study

BACKGROUND

Rituximab (RTX) is an extensively used off-label drug for multiple sclerosis (MS), whereas the induction and maintenance regimens vary widely among studies. Few data are available on efficacy and safety of repeated low-dose RTX therapy in MS patients.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of repeated low-dose RTX therapy for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), the most common form of MS affecting approximately 85% of patients.

METHODS

Nine RRMS patients were enrolled and the medical records were retrospectively reviewed. RTX at 100 mg per week for three consecutive weeks was used as induction therapy. Maintenance therapy was reinfusions of RTX at 100 mg every 6 months during the first year, followed by 100 mg every 6 to 12 months. Main outcome measures included annualized relapse rate (ARR), expanded disability status scale (EDSS) score, and T2 lesion burden on MRI for evaluating the efficacy of low-dose RTX regimen. Meanwhile, adverse events (AEs) were recorded to assess the safety of repeated RTX infusions.

RESULTS

All patients were females with an average onset age of 25.4 ± 6.7 years. The median disease duration before the first RTX infusion was 56 (range, 3-108) months and the median follow-up period was 30 (range, 15-40) months. No relapses were recorded in all patients after RTX therapy. Repeated low-dose RTX therapy resulted in a dramatic reduction of median ARR (pre-RTX vs post-RTX, 1.1 vs 0, p = 0.012), median EDSS score (2.0 vs 0, p = 0.007), and the number of T2 lesions on MRI (35.6 ± 18.0 vs 29.4 ± 18.1, p = 0.001). A total of 35 episodes of AEs occurred during repeated low-dose RTX therapy, and all of them were mild and transient.

CONCLUSION

Repeated low-dose RTX therapy is cost-effective for RRMS patients and shows a good safety profile. It may be a promising option for those having no access or poor response to first-line disease-modified drugs (DMDs), particularly in low- or middle-income countries.

Sustained Low Relapse Rate With Highly Variable B-Cell Repopulation Dynamics With Extended Rituximab Dosing Intervals in Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

B cell-depleting therapies are highly effective in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) but are associated with increased infection risk and blunted humoral vaccination responses. Extension of dosing intervals may mitigate such negative effects, but its consequences on MS disease activity are yet to be ascertained. The objective of this study was to determine clinical and neuroradiologic disease activity, as well as B-cell repopulation dynamics, after implementation of extended rituximab dosing in RRMS.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study in a specialized-care, single-center setting, including patients with RRMS participating in the COMBAT-MS and MultipleMS observational drug trials, who had received at least 2 courses of rituximab (median follow-up 4.2 years, range 0.1-8.9 years). Using Cox regression, hazard ratios (HRs) of clinical relapse and/or contrast-enhancing lesions on MRI were calculated in relation to time since last dose of rituximab.

RESULTS

A total of 3,904 dose intervals were accumulated in 718 patients and stratified into 4 intervals: <8, ≥8 to 12, ≥12 to 18, and ≥18 months. We identified 24 relapses of which 20 occurred within 8 months since previous infusion and 4 with intervals over 8 months. HRs for relapse when comparing ≥8 to 12, ≥12 to 18, and ≥18 months with <8 months since last dose were 0.28 (95% CI 0.04-2.10), 0.38 (95% CI 0.05-2.94), and 0.89 (95% CI 0.20-4.04), respectively, and thus nonsignificant. Neuroradiologic outcomes mirrored relapse rates. Dynamics of total B-cell reconstitution varied considerably, but median total B-cell counts reached lower level of normal after 12 months and median memory B-cell counts after 16 months.

DISCUSSION

In this prospective cohort of rituximab-treated patients with RRMS exposed to extended dosing intervals, we could not detect a relation between clinical or neuroradiologic disease activity and time since last infusion. Total B- and memory B-cell repopulation kinetics varied considerably. These findings, relevant for assessing risk-mitigation strategies with anti-CD20 therapies in RRMS, suggest that relapse risk remains low with extended infusion intervals. Further studies are needed to investigate the relation between B-cell repopulation dynamics and adverse event risks associated with B-cell depletion.

Analysis of Rituximab Use, Time Between Rituximab and SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination, and COVID-19 Hospitalization or Death in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis

IMPORTANCE

Rituximab and other B-cell-depleting therapies blunt humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, particularly when the vaccine is administered within 6 months of an infusion. Whether this translates into an increased risk of hospitalization or death from COVID-19 is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether rituximab treatment is associated with an increased risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 among SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated persons with multiple sclerosis (MS) and whether delaying vaccination more than 6 months after rituximab treatment is associated with decreased risk.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study used Kaiser Permanente Southern California's electronic health record to identify individuals from January 1, 2020, to February 15, 2022, who had MS and who had been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.

EXPOSURES

Rituximab treatment compared with disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) that do not interfere with vaccine efficacy or being untreated (no or other DMT group). Among rituximab-treated patients, the exposure was receiving at least 1 vaccine dose more than 6 months after their last infusion compared with receiving all vaccine doses 6 months or less since their last infusion.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was hospitalization due to COVID-19 infection. The odds of infection resulting in hospitalization following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were adjusted for race and ethnicity, advanced MS-related disability; vaccine type; booster dose; and, among rituximab-treated only analyses, cumulative rituximab dose and dose at last infusion. Exposures, outcomes, and covariates were collected from the electronic health record.

RESULTS

Among 3974 SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated people with MS (mean [SD] age, 55.3 [15] years; 2982 [75.0%] female; 103 [2.6%] Asian or Pacific Islander; 634 [16.0%] Black; 953 [24.0%] Hispanic; 2269 [57.1%] White; and 15 [0.3%] other race or ethnicity), rituximab-treated patients (n = 1516) were more likely to be hospitalized (n = 27) but not die (n = 0) compared with the 2458 individuals with MS receiving no or other DMTs (n = 7 and n = 0, respectively; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for hospitalization, 7.33; 95% CI, 3.05-17.63). Receiving messenger RNA (mRNA) SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (aOR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.90; P = .03) and receiving a booster vaccination (aOR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15-0.64; P = .002) were independently associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization for COVID-19. Among vaccinated rituximab-treated individuals with MS, receiving any vaccination dose more than 6 months after the last rituximab infusion was associated with a reduced risk of COVID-19 hospitalization (aOR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.10-0.49).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study's findings suggest that rituximab-treated people with MS should be strongly encouraged to receive mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and boosters more than 6 months after their last rituximab infusion whenever possible. The low absolute risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 among mRNA-vaccinated individuals with MS should not preclude use of rituximab, which has marked efficacy, cost, and convenience advantages over other DMTs.

Early B cells repopulation in multiple sclerosis patients treated with rituximab is not predictive of a risk of relapse or clinical progression

BACKGROUND

It is currently unknown whether early B cell reconstitution (EBR) in MS patients under rituximab is associated with a risk of relapse or progression.

OBJECTIVES

Analyzing EBR in rituximab-treated patients and its putative association with clinical findings.

METHODS

Prospective lymphocytes immunophenotyping was performed in a monocentric cohort of MS patients treated by rituximab for 2 years. EBR was defined when B cells concentration was > 5 cells/mm3. B cell subsets were retrospectively associated with clinical data. Clinical and radiological monitoring included relapses, EDSS (Expanded Disability Status Scale), SDMT (Symbol Digit Modalities Test), and MRI.

RESULTS

182 patients were analyzed (61 remitting-relapsing and 121 progressive-active). 38.5% experienced EBR at least once, but very few (7/182) showed systematic reconstitution. Most patients remained stable upon treatment, regardless of the occurrence of EBR. Dynamics of B cell reconstitution featured increased naïve/transitional B cells, and decreased memory subsets. Homeostasis of the B cell compartment differed at baseline between patients experiencing or not EBR upon treatment. In patients with EBR, reciprocal dynamics of transitional and pro-inflammatory double-negative B cell subsets was associated with better response to rituximab treatment.

CONCLUSION

EBR is common in rituximab-treated MS patients and is not associated with clinical disease activity. EBR in the peripheral blood may reflect regulatory immunological phenomena in subgroup of patients.

Delayed B cell repopulation after rituximab treatment in multiple sclerosis patients with expanded adaptive NK cells

Background and purpose

The aim was to evaluate whether adaptive NKG2C+ natural killer (NK) cells, characterized by enhanced antibody‐dependent cell cytotoxicity (ADCC), may influence time to B cell repopulation after rituximab treatment in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients.

Methods

This was a prospective observational study of MS patients treated with rituximab monitoring peripheral B cells for repeated doses. B cell repopulation was defined as CD19+ cells above 2% of total lymphocytes, classifying cases according to the median time of B cell repopulation as early or late (≤9 months, >9 months, respectively). Basal NK cell immunophenotype and in vitro ADCC responses induced by rituximab were assessed by flow cytometry.

Results

B cell repopulation in 38 patients (24 relapsing–remitting MS [RRMS]; 14 progressive MS) was classified as early (≤9 months, n = 19) or late (>9 months, n = 19). RRMS patients with late B cell repopulation had higher proportions of NKG2C+ NK cells compared to those with early repopulation (24.7% ± 16.2% vs. 11.3% ± 10.4%, p < 0.05), and a direct correlation between time to B cell repopulation and percentage of NKG2C+ NK cells (R 0.45, p < 0.05) was observed. RRMS cases with late repopulation compared with early repopulation had a higher secretion of tumor necrosis factor α and interferon γ by NK cells after rituximab‐dependent NK cell activation. The NK cell immunophenotype appeared unrelated to B cell repopulation in progressive MS patients.

Conclusions

Adaptive NKG2C+ NK cells in RRMS may be associated with delayed B cell repopulation after rituximab, a finding probably related to enhanced depletion of B cells exerted by NK‐cell‐mediated ADCC, pointing to the use of personalized regimens with anti‐CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy in some patients.

Extended dosing of monoclonal antibodies in multiple sclerosis

Over the past two decades, treatment options for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) have increased exponentially. In the current therapeutic landscape, "no evidence of MS disease activity" is within reach in many of our patients. Minimizing risks of complications, improving treatment convenience, and decreasing health care costs are goals that are yet to be reached. One way to optimize MS therapy is to implement personalized or extended interval dosing. Monoclonal antibodies are suitable candidates for personalized dosing (by therapeutic drug monitoring) or extended interval dosing. An increasing number of studies are performed and underway reporting on altered dosing intervals of anti-α₄β₁-integrin treatment (natalizumab) and anti-CD20 treatment (ocrelizumab, rituximab, and ofatumumab) in MS. In this review, current available evidence regarding personalized and extended interval dosing of monoclonal antibodies in MS is discussed with recommendations for future research and clinical practice.

Determining the best window for BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 in patients with multiple sclerosis receiving anti-CD20 therapy

We studied the serologic response to the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine at four weeks after the second dose in patients with RRMS treated with rituximab with extended-interval dosing (n = 26). At four weeks, 73% of patients were seropositive. No patient without B cells at the first dose (n = 4) was seropositive. Four of seven (57%) patients with B-cell proportion >0% and ≤5% were seropositive. All patients with B-cell proportion >5% (n = 15) were seropositive. In all patients, quantitative ELISA measures after vaccination were correlated with B-cell counts measured before vaccination. In patients receiving rituximab, seropositivity after BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination emerged only after B-cell repopulation.

Rituximab for people with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is the most common neurological cause of disability in young adults. Off-label rituximab for MS is used in most countries surveyed by the International Federation of MS, including high-income countries where on-label disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) are available.  OBJECTIVES: To assess beneficial and adverse effects of rituximab as 'first choice' and as 'switching' for adults with MS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and trial registers for completed and ongoing studies on 31 January 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) comparing rituximab with placebo or another DMT for adults with MS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We used the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. We rated the certainty of evidence using GRADE for: disability worsening, relapse, serious adverse events (SAEs), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), common infections, cancer, and mortality. We conducted separate analyses for rituximab as 'first choice' or as 'switching', relapsing or progressive MS, comparison versus placebo or another DMT, and RCTs or NRSIs.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies (5 RCTs, 10 NRSIs) with 16,429 participants of whom 13,143 were relapsing MS and 3286 progressive MS. The studies were one to two years long and compared rituximab as 'first choice' with placebo (1 RCT) or other DMTs (1 NRSI), rituximab as 'switching' against placebo (2 RCTs) or other DMTs (2 RCTs, 9 NRSIs). The studies were conducted worldwide; most originated from high-income countries, six from the Swedish MS register. Pharmaceutical companies funded two studies. We identified 14 ongoing studies. Rituximab as 'first choice' for relapsing MS Rituximab versus placebo: no studies met eligibility criteria for this comparison. Rituximab versus other DMTs: one NRSI compared rituximab with interferon beta or glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, natalizumab, or fingolimod in active relapsing MS at 24 months' follow-up. Rituximab likely results in a large reduction in relapses compared with interferon beta or glatiramer acetate (hazard ratio (HR) 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.39; 335 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Rituximab may reduce relapses compared with dimethyl fumarate (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.00; 206 participants; low-certainty evidence) and natalizumab (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.00; 170 participants; low-certainty evidence). It may make little or no difference on relapse compared with fingolimod (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.69; 137 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study reported no deaths over 24 months. The study did not measure disability worsening, SAEs, HRQoL, and common infections. Rituximab as 'first choice' for progressive MS One RCT compared rituximab with placebo in primary progressive MS at 24 months' follow-up. Rituximab likely results in little to no difference in the number of participants who have disability worsening compared with placebo (odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.11; 439 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Rituximab may result in little to no difference in recurrence of relapses (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.99; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence), SAEs (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.20; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence), common infections (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.73; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence), cancer (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.59; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence), and mortality (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.02 to 2.77; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure HRQoL. Rituximab versus other DMTs: no studies met eligibility criteria for this comparison. Rituximab as 'switching' for relapsing MS  One RCT compared rituximab with placebo in relapsing MS at 12 months' follow-up. Rituximab may decrease recurrence of relapses compared with placebo (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.93; 104 participants; low-certainty evidence). The data did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of rituximab relative to placebo on SAEs (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.92; 104 participants; very low-certainty evidence), common infections (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.24; 104 participants; very low-certainty evidence), cancer (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.06 to 39.15; 104 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and mortality (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.06 to 39.15; 104 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure disability worsening and HRQoL.  Five NRSIs compared rituximab with other DMTs in relapsing MS at 24 months' follow-up. The data did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of rituximab relative to interferon beta or glatiramer acetate on disability worsening (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.42; 1 NRSI, 853 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Rituximab likely results in a large reduction in relapses compared with interferon beta or glatiramer acetate (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49; 1 NRSI, 1383 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and fingolimod (HR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.32; 1 NRSI, 256 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The data did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of rituximab relative to natalizumab on relapses (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.2 to 5.0; 1 NRSI, 153 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Rituximab likely increases slightly common infections compared with interferon beta or glatiramer acetate (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.62; 1 NRSI, 5477 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and compared with natalizumab (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.32; 2 NRSIs, 5001 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Rituximab may increase slightly common infections compared with fingolimod (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.77; 3 NRSIs, 5187 participants; low-certainty evidence). It may make little or no difference compared with ocrelizumab (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.40; 1 NRSI, 472 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The data did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of rituximab on mortality compared with fingolimod (OR 5.59, 95% CI 0.22 to 139.89; 1 NRSI, 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and natalizumab (OR 6.66, 95% CI 0.27 to 166.58; 1 NRSI, 153 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The included studies did not measure SAEs, HRQoL, and cancer.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For preventing relapses in relapsing MS, rituximab as 'first choice' and as 'switching' may compare favourably with a wide range of approved DMTs. A protective effect of rituximab against disability worsening is uncertain. There is limited information to determine the effect of rituximab for progressive MS.  The evidence is uncertain about the effect of rituximab on SAEs. They are relatively rare in people with MS, thus difficult to study, and they were not well reported in studies. There is an increased risk of common infections with rituximab, but absolute risk is small.  Rituximab is widely used as off-label treatment in people with MS; however, randomised evidence is weak. In the absence of randomised evidence, remaining uncertainties on beneficial and adverse effects of rituximab for MS might be clarified by making real-world data available.