Natalizumab in aggressive multiple sclerosis after haematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Current knowledge on multiple sclerosis pathophysiology, disability progression assessment and treatment options, and the role of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune disease of the central nervous system (CNS) that affects nearly 2.8 million people each year. MS distinguishes three main types: relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), secondary progressive MS (SPMS) and primary progressive MS (PPMS). RRMS is the most common type, with the majority of patients eventually progressing to SPMS, in which neurological development is constant, whereas PPMS is characterized by a progressive course from disease onset. New or additional insights into the role of effector and regulatory cells of the immune and CNS systems, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection, and the microbiome in the pathophysiology of MS have emerged, which may lead to the development of more targeted therapies that can halt or reverse neurodegeneration. Depending on the type and severity of the disease, various disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are currently used for RRMS/SPMS and PPMS. As a last resort, and especially in highly active RRMS that does not respond to DMTs, autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is performed and has shown good results in reducing neuroinflammation. Nevertheless, the question of its potential role in preventing disability progression remains open. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive update on MS pathophysiology, assessment of MS disability progression and current treatments, and to examine the potential role of AHSCT in preventing disability progression.

Challenges and Opportunities for Biomarkers of Clinical Response to AHSCT in Autoimmunity

Autoimmunity represents a broad category of diseases that involve a variety of organ targets and distinct autoantigens. For patients with autoimmune diseases who fail to respond to approved disease-modifying treatments, autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) after high-dose immunosuppressive therapy provides an alternative strategy. Although more than 100 studies have been published on AHSCT efficacy in autoimmunity, the mechanisms that confer long-term disease remission as opposed to continued deterioration or disease reactivation remain to be determined. In a phase II clinical trial, high-dose immunosuppressive therapy combined with autologous CD34⁺ hematopoietic stem cell transplant in treatment-resistant, relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) resulted in 69.2% of participants achieving long-term remission through 60 months follow-up. Flow cytometry data from the 24 transplanted participants in the high-dose immunosuppression and autologous stem cell transplantation for poor prognosis multiple sclerosis (HALT-MS) trial are presented to illustrate immune reconstitution out to 36 months in patients with aggressive RRMS treated with AHSCT and to highlight experimental challenges inherent in identifying biomarkers for relapse and long-term remission through 60 months follow-up. AHSCT induced changes in numbers of CD4 T cells and in the composition of CD4 and CD8 T cells that persisted through 36 months in participants who maintained disease remission through 60 months. However, changes in T cell phenotypes studied were unable to clearly discriminate durable remission from disease reactivation after AHSCT, possibly due to the small sample size, limited phenotypes evaluated in this real-time assay, and other limitations of the HALT-MS study population. Strategies and future opportunities for identifying biomarkers of clinical outcome to AHSCT in autoimmunity are also discussed.

Long-term follow-up more than 10 years after HSCT: a monocentric experience

BACKGROUND

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) is used in aggressive relapsing and progressive multiple sclerosis (MS). The multicentre studies and case series reported have relatively short follow-up.

AIM

To evaluate long-term effect and safety of HSCT in MS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients referred to the MS centre of Cagliari and undergoing HSCT were included. Variations in relapses and EDSS before and after HSCT were evaluated by Wilcoxon test. A descriptive analysis was made for other clinical data.

RESULTS

Nine patients (female 6, males 3; 5 relapsing-remitting, 2 secondary progressive, 1 primary progressive, and 1 progressive relapsing) performed HSCT (1999-2006). The median follow-up was 11 years (11-18). Eight patients underwent aHSCT, seven using a low intensity conditioning regimen, and one an intermediate intensity. The primary progressive underwent allogeneic HSCT, due to onco hematological disease. The relapses number decreased in the 2 years following the procedure compared to the two preceding years (p = 0.041). New relapses or disease progressions were observed after a range of 7 (low intensity regimen)-118 (intermediate intensity) months. At last follow-up, the EDSS was stable in two patients, improved in two, and worse in five (maximum 2 EDSS in one patient). Six patients showed new lesions, and seven gadolinium-enhancing on brain MRI after a mean of 23.3 and 19.8 months, respectively. Two serious adverse events were reported: melanoma, and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

Our results confirm in a long follow-up the efficacy of HSCT in reducing relapses and disability progression. The risk/benefit profile is better for intermediate intensity regimens.

Characterising aggressive multiple sclerosis

OBJECTIVE

To explore the occurrence and characteristics of aggressive multiple sclerosis (AMS) in adult-onset multiple sclerosis (MS) patients.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data (1980-2009) from British Columbia, Canada, were retrospectively analysed. AMS was defined in three different ways (AMS1, 2 and 3): 'AMS1'--confirmed Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) ≥ 6 within 5 years of MS onset; 'AMS2'--confirmed EDSS ≥ 6 by age 40; and 'AMS3'--secondary progressive MS within 3 years of a relapsing-onset course. Three respective 'non-aggressive' MS comparison cohorts were selected. Patients' characteristics were compared between aggressive and non-aggressive cohorts using multivariable logistic regression, with findings expressed as adjusted OR (AOR) and 95% CI.

RESULTS

Application of the three definitions to the source population of 5891 patients resulted in 235/4285 (5.5%) patients fulfilling criteria for AMS1 (59.6% were female; 74.5% had relapsing-onset MS), 388/2762 (14.0%) for AMS2 (65.2% were female; 92.8% had relapsing-onset MS) and 195/4918 (4.0%) patients for AMS3 (61.0% were female). Compared to the respective control cohorts, those with AMS were more likely to be male (AOR=1.5, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.0 (AMS1); 1.6, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.1 (AMS2); 1.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.4 (AMS3)), older at MS symptom onset (AOR=1.1; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.1 (AMS1 and AMS3)) and have primary progressive MS (AOR=2.3, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.3 (AMS1); 2.7, 95% CI 1.7 to 4.4 (AMS2)).

CONCLUSIONS

AMS was identified in 4-14% of patients, depending on the definition used. Although there was a relative preponderance of men and primary progressive MS presenting with AMS, the majority of patients were still women and those with relapsing-onset MS.