Impact of peginterferon beta-1a and disease factors on quality of life in multiple sclerosis

Clinical trial evidence of quality-of-life effects of disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis: a systematic analysis

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, patients, clinicians, and regulators call for more evidence on the impact of innovative medicines on quality of life (QoL). We assessed the effects of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) on QoL in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS).

METHODS

Randomized trials assessing approved DMTs in PwMS with results for at least one outcome referred to as "quality of life" were searched in PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov.

RESULTS

We identified 38 trials published between 1999 and 2023 with a median of 531 participants (interquartile range (IQR) 202 to 941; total 23,225). The evaluated DMTs were mostly interferon-beta (n = 10; 26%), fingolimod (n = 7; 18%), natalizumab (n = 5; 13%), and glatiramer acetate (n = 4; 11%). The 38 trials used 18 different QoL instruments, with up to 11 QoL subscale measures per trial (median 2; IQR 1-3). QoL was never the single primary outcome. We identified quantitative QoL results in 24 trials (63%), and narrative statements in 15 trials (39%). In 16 trials (42%), at least one of the multiple QoL results was statistically significant. The effect sizes of the significant quantitative QoL results were large (median Cohen's d 1.02; IQR 0.3-1.7; median Hedges' g 1.01; IQR 0.3-1.69) and ranged between d 0.14 and 2.91.

CONCLUSIONS

Certain DMTs have the potential to positively impact QoL of PwMS, and the assessment and reporting of QoL is suboptimal with a multitude of diverse instruments being used. There is an urgent need that design and reporting of clinical trials reflect the critical importance of QoL for PwMS.

Improvements in quality of life over 2 years with cladribine tablets in people with relapsing multiple sclerosis: The CLARIFY-MS study

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) negatively affects health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate HRQoL in people with highly active relapsing MS treated with cladribine tablets (CladT; 3.5 mg/kg cumulative dose over 2 years) in CLARIFY-MS.

METHODS

Changes in the MS quality of life (MSQoL)-54 scores were analysed using a repeated mixed-effects linear model. Subgroup analyses were performed for participants who were pretreatment-naïve and those pretreated with disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) before initiating CladT. Safety and tolerability of CladT were also assessed.

RESULTS

MSQoL-54 physical (mean change = 4.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.18, 6.53) and mental health (4.80; 95% CI = 3.13, 6.46) composite scores (primary endpoints) showed significant improvement at Month 24 versus Baseline (p < 0.0001). Changes in the MSQoL-54 scores were consistent across the pretreatment-naïve and DMT-pretreated subgroups. No new severe or opportunistic infections occurred. Most post-baseline lymphopenia events were Grade 1-2 in severity. Transient Grade-3 lymphopenia was observed in 19.7% (95/482) of participants. Grade-4 lymphopenia was not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

CladT treatment significantly improved the mean MSQoL-54 physical and mental health composite scores over 2 years. CladT efficacy in HRQoL, relapse rates and Expanded Disability Status Scale scores demonstrates its multidimensional effects in MS treatment.

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.

Patient reported outcomes in a secondary progressive MS cohort related to cognition, MRI and physical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly being used as outcomes in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) trials. We examined how PROs reflect disease burden in SPMS.

METHODS

In this observational prospective study, 65 SPMS patients were examined by five different PROs (Fatigue Scale Motor Cognition (FSMC), Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale version 2 (MSIS-29v2), 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), EQ-5D-5L and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Multiple Sclerosis version 2.0 (WPAI:MS)); two different rating scales, Multiple Sclerosis Impairment Scale (MSIS) and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS); functional tests of mobility (Timed-25-Foot Walk (T-25FW), 6-Spot Step Test (6-SST) and (9-Hole Peg Test (9-HPT)); cognitive tests (Symbol Digital Modalities Test (SDMT) and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R)); and multimodal Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI).

RESULTS

When the PROs were divided into physical and psychological subscores, the PRO physical subscores of FSMC, MSIS-29v2 and SF-36v2 correlated with physical rating scales (EDSS, MSIS) and physical measures of upper (9-HPT) and lower extremity function (T-25FW and 6-SST)) (p = 0.04-0.0001). 9-HPT correlated the least with physical subscores of PROs but showed the strongest correlation with activity impairment (subscore of WPAI:MS). In contrast, psychological PRO subscores of FSMC, MSIS-29v2 and SF-36v2 did not reflect the cognitive outcomes (SDMT and BVMT-R), although the cognitive scores correlated with disease burden indicated by MRI lesion volumes. The psychological PRO subscores did not correlate with fatigue, physical and MRI outcomes either.

CONCLUSION

Correlation between PRO physical subscores and physical outcomes supports PROs as potentially useful clinical endpoints in SPMS. The results of this study indicate that patients with SPMS highly perceive their mobility on function of their lower extremities, while they perceive their daily activities highly dependent on function of the upper extremities. Psychological subscores of MS specific PROs may be less suitable as surrogate markers for the cognitive status and should be considered as a mental quality of life measurement independent of disease burden.

Matching-adjusted comparisons demonstrate better clinical outcomes in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis treated with peginterferon beta-1a than with teriflunomide

BACKGROUND

Peginterferon beta-1a and teriflunomide are both first-line disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) approved for the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS); however, no head-to-head trials have directly compared their clinical efficacy. We performed a matching-adjusted comparison of individual patient data from the peginterferon beta-1a pivotal phase 3 study, ADVANCE, and its extension study, ATTAIN, with pooled aggregated data from the teriflunomide pivotal phase 3 studies, TEMSO and TOWER.

METHODS

A total of 512 patients randomized to subcutaneous (SC) peginterferon beta-1a 125 mcg every 2 weeks in ADVANCE and 731 patients randomized to teriflunomide 14 mg daily (359 from TEMSO and 372 from TOWER) were matched on key baseline characteristics. After matching, weighted annualized relapse rate (ARR) and 24-week confirmed disability worsening (CDW) were calculated and compared for peginterferon beta-1a- and teriflunomide-treated patients. A subset analysis comparing weighted ARR in patients who were newly diagnosed with RMS (diagnosis ≤1 year before study enrollment and disease-modifying therapy naïve) was also performed.

RESULTS

After matching, the peginterferon beta-1a and teriflunomide treatment groups were identically matched across baseline characteristics. The proportion of patients in the overall study populations with 24-week CDW at 108 weeks was significantly lower in the peginterferon beta-1a group than the teriflunomide group both before matching (8.5% vs 12.6%; P = 0.0249) and after matching (8.4% vs 12.6%; P = 0.0323). ARR at 108 weeks was numerically lower with peginterferon beta-1a than with teriflunomide both before matching (0.278 vs 0.354; P = 0.1326) and after matching (0.257 vs 0.354; P = 0.0510). Newly diagnosed patients treated with peginterferon beta-1a had numerically lower ARR than patients treated with teriflunomide both at 108 weeks (before matching: 0.225 vs 0.270; P = 0.587; after matching: 0.201 vs 0.270; P = 0.384) and at 5 years (before matching: 0.150 vs 0.196; after matching: 0.142 vs 0.196).

CONCLUSIONS

In this matching-adjusted comparison of patients with RMS from three phase 3 trials, a significantly lower proportion of patients treated with SC peginterferon beta-1a 125 mcg every 2 weeks than with oral teriflunomide 14 mg once daily had 24-week CDW at 108 weeks. In addition, in both the overall population and newly diagnosed patient subgroups, ARR at 108 weeks was numerically lower with peginterferon beta-1a than with teriflunomide. The numerically lower ARR in newly diagnosed patients treated with peginterferon beta-1a compared with those treated with teriflunomide was sustained through up to 5 years of treatment.

Long-term outcomes of peginterferon beta-1a in multiple sclerosis: results from the ADVANCE extension study, ATTAIN

Background

ADVANCE was a phase III trial of the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous peginterferon beta-1a 125 µg every 2 or 4 weeks in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). ATTAIN was a 2-year extension study of ADVANCE. The aim was to evaluate the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of peginterferon beta-1a 125 µg every 2 or 4 weeks in ATTAIN.

Methods

ADVANCE dosing schedules were maintained in ATTAIN, except that every-4-weeks dosing patients were switched to every-2-weeks dosing after conversion of the study to an open-label protocol. ATTAIN was considered complete when the last patient completed the 96-week extension study. Primary endpoints included adverse event (AE) and serious AE (SAE) incidence. Secondary endpoints included relapse, magnetic resonance imaging, and disability outcomes.

Results

Of the 1512 patients randomized in ADVANCE, 1076 (71%) continued treatment in ATTAIN; of these, 842 (78%) completed the open-label extension study. During ATTAIN, 478 patients (87%) in the every-2-weeks group and 471 patients (89%) in the every-4-weeks group experienced an AE; SAEs were reported in 90 patients (16%) in the every-2-weeks group and 113 patients (21%) in the every-4-weeks group. The most frequent AEs reported were injection site reactions and flu-like symptoms, both of which numerically decreased over time. Peginterferon beta-1a every 2 weeks versus every 4 weeks significantly reduced the adjusted annualized relapse rate over 6 years (0.188 versus 0.263, p = 0.0052) and the risk of relapse over 5 years (36% versus 49%, p = 0.0018). Fewer new T1, new/newly enlarging T2, and gadolinium-enhancing magnetic resonance imaging lesions were observed with every-2-weeks dosing than every-4-weeks dosing over 4 years.

Conclusions

Results from the ADVANCE extension study, ATTAIN, confirm the favorable long-term safety and tolerability profile of peginterferon beta-1a in patients with RRMS and provide additional evidence for the clinical and radiological benefits associated with this therapy.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of beta-interferon and glatiramer acetate for treating multiple sclerosis: systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

At the time of publication of the most recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance [technology appraisal (TA) 32] in 2002 on beta-interferon (IFN-β) and glatiramer acetate (GA) for multiple sclerosis, there was insufficient evidence of their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

To undertake (1) systematic reviews of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IFN-β and GA in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) and clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) compared with best supportive care (BSC) and each other, investigating annualised relapse rate (ARR) and time to disability progression confirmed at 3 months and 6 months and (2) cost-effectiveness assessments of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for CIS and RRMS compared with BSC and each other.

REVIEW METHODS

Searches were undertaken in January and February 2016 in databases including The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and the Science Citation Index. We limited some database searches to specific start dates based on previous, relevant systematic reviews. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts with recourse to a third when needed. The Cochrane tool and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and Philips checklists were used for appraisal. Narrative synthesis and, when possible, random-effects meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed. Cost-effectiveness analysis used published literature, findings from the Department of Health's risk-sharing scheme (RSS) and expert opinion. A de novo economic model was built for CIS. The base case used updated RSS data, a NHS and Personal Social Services perspective, a 50-year time horizon, 2014/15 prices and a discount rate of 3.5%. Outcomes are reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We undertook probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 6420 publications were identified, of which 63 relating to 35 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. In total, 86% had a high risk of bias. There was very little difference between drugs in reducing moderate or severe relapse rates in RRMS. All were beneficial compared with BSC, giving a pooled rate ratio of 0.65 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.76] for ARR and a hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.87) for time to disability progression confirmed at 3 months. NMA suggested that 20 mg of GA given subcutaneously had the highest probability of being the best at reducing ARR. Three separate cost-effectiveness searches identified > 2500 publications, with 26 included studies informing the narrative synthesis and model inputs. In the base case using a modified RSS the mean incremental cost was £31,900 for pooled DMTs compared with BSC and the mean incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were 0.943, giving an ICER of £33,800 per QALY gained for people with RRMS. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis the ICER was £34,000 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analysis, using the assessment group inputs gave an ICER of £12,800 per QALY gained for pooled DMTs compared with BSC. Pegylated IFN-β-1 (125 µg) was the most cost-effective option of the individual DMTs compared with BSC (ICER £7000 per QALY gained); GA (20 mg) was the most cost-effective treatment for CIS (ICER £16,500 per QALY gained).

LIMITATIONS

Although we built a de novo model for CIS that incorporated evidence from our systematic review of clinical effectiveness, our findings relied on a population diagnosed with CIS before implementation of the revised 2010 McDonald criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

DMTs were clinically effective for RRMS and CIS but cost-effective only for CIS. Both RCT evidence and RSS data are at high risk of bias. Research priorities include comparative studies with longer follow-up and systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016043278.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Evolution of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Their Role in Multiple Sclerosis Clinical Trials

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are playing an increasing role in multiple sclerosis (MS) research and practice, and are essential for understanding the effects that MS and MS treatments have on patients' lives. PROs are captured directly from patients and include symptoms, function, health status, and health-related quality of life. In this article, we review different categories (e.g., generic, targeted, preference-based) of PRO measures and considerations in selecting a measure. The PROs included in MS clinical research have evolved over time, as have the measures used to assess them. We describe findings from recent MS clinical trials that included PROs when evaluating Food and Drug Administration-approved disease-modifying therapies (e.g., daclizumab, teriflunomide). Variation in the measures used in these trials makes it difficult to draw any conclusions from the data. We therefore suggest a standardized approach to PRO assessment in MS research and describe 2 generic, National Institutes of Health-supported measurement systems [Neuro-QoL and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)] that would facilitate such an approach. The use of PROs in MS care and research is expanding beyond clinical trials, as is demonstrated by examples from comparative effectiveness and other patient-centered research. The importance of PRO assessment is expected to continue to grow in the future.

Measuring the impact of multiple sclerosis: Enhancing the measurement performance of the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) using Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT)

BACKGROUND

Study objectives were to evaluate the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) and explore an optimized scoring structure based on empirical post-hoc analyses of data from the Phase III ADVANCE clinical trial.

METHODS

ADVANCE MSIS-29 data from six time-points were analyzed in a sample of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis was undertaken to examine three broad areas: sample-to-scale targeting, measurement scale properties, and sample measurement validity. Interpretation of results led to an alternative MSIS-29 scoring structure, further evaluated alongside responsiveness of the original and revised scales at Week 48.

RESULTS

RMT analysis provided mixed evidence for Physical and Psychological Impact scales that were sub-optimally targeted at the lower functioning end of the scales. Their conceptual basis could also stand to improve based on item fit results. The revised MSIS-29 rescored scales improved but did not resolve the measurement scale properties and targeting of the MSIS-29. In two out of three revised scales, responsiveness analysis indicated strengthened ability to detect change.

CONCLUSION

The revised MSIS-29 provides an initial evidence-based improved patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument for evaluating the impact of MS. Revised scoring improves conceptual clarity and interpretation of scores by refining scale structure to include Symptoms, Psychological Impact, and General Limitations.

CLINICAL TRIAL

ADVANCE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00906399).

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis: Impact of Disease-Modifying Drugs

Multiple sclerosis (MS) has a profound impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), a comprehensive subjective measure of the patient's health status. Assessment of HRQoL informs on the potential advantages and disadvantages of disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) beyond their effects on observer-based disability and magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities. This article reviews published data from randomized controlled trials and observational studies regarding the effects of currently available DMDs on HRQoL. Data indicate that DMD treatment is associated with prevention of worsening or with improvement of HRQoL, and that, in general, second-line DMDs may have a greater impact on HRQoL than first-line DMDs. In clinical practice, monitoring of HRQoL provides clinicians with unique information regarding disease impact and potential benefits and adverse effects of DMD treatment that may not be obtained otherwise; it might also permit early detection of an unfavorable disease course. It is suggested to assess HRQoL at the time of diagnosis and before starting or switching DMD treatment. Regular HRQoL measurements contribute to a comprehensive clinical evaluation, and may help to elucidate and quantify the patient's contribution to shared decision making regarding DMD treatment. Further studies are needed to better determine the role of HRQoL assessments in daily MS care.

Peginterferon beta-1a reduces disability worsening in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: 2-year results from ADVANCE

BACKGROUND

In the pivotal phase III 2-year ADVANCE study, subcutaneous peginterferon beta-1a 125 mcg every 2 weeks demonstrated significant improvements in clinical outcomes, including disability endpoints, in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Here, we aim to further evaluate disability data from ADVANCE, and explore associations between confirmed disability progression (CDP), functional status, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

METHODS

In total, 1512 patients were randomized to placebo or peginterferon beta-1a 125 mcg every 2 or 4 weeks. After 1 year, patients on placebo were re-randomized to peginterferon beta-1a every 2 or 4 weeks. CDP was defined as ⩾1.0 point increase from a baseline Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score ⩾ 1.0, or ⩾1.5-point increase from baseline 0, confirmed 12 or 24 weeks after onset.

RESULTS

Peginterferon beta-1a every 2 weeks significantly reduced risk of 12- and 24-week CDP at 1 year compared with placebo (12-week CDP: 6.8% versus 10.5%, p = 0.038; 24-week CDP: 4% versus 8.4%, p = 0.0069, peginterferon beta-1a every 2 weeks versus placebo, respectively). Benefits were maintained over 2 years (11.2% and 7.7%, peginterferon beta-1a every 2 weeks in 12- and 24-week CDP, respectively). Approximately 90% of patients with 24-week CDP had simultaneous worsening by ⩾1 point in at least one functional system score, most commonly pyramidal. Displaying a 24-week CDP was associated with worse scores on the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) scale and several HRQoL instruments; the impact of CDP was attenuated by treatment with peginterferon beta-1a every 2 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Peginterferon beta-1a has the potential to prevent/delay worsening of disability in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Furthermore, improved benefits in disability status with peginterferon beta-1a were also associated with improved functional status and HRQoL [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00906399].

Improvement in relapse recovery with peginterferon beta-1a in patients with multiple sclerosis

Background

Subcutaneous peginterferon beta-1a every 2 weeks significantly affects clinical outcomes in patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

Objectives

To explore relationships between relapses and worsening of disability in patients with RRMS, and assess the treatment effect of peginterferon beta-1a on relapse recovery.

Methods

Post-hoc analysis of the 2-year, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, Phase 3 ADVANCE study. The severity of relapses, proportion of patients with relapses associated with residual disability (onset of 24-week confirmed disability progression (CDP) within 90 days following a relapse), and persistence of changes in Functional Systems Scores, were compared between treatment groups.

Results

Subcutaneous peginterferon beta-1a every 2 weeks significantly reduced the proportion of patients experiencing relapse associated with CDP over 2 years (6.6%, compared with 15.1% of patients who received placebo in Year 1; p = 0.02). Reduction in relapses associated with residual disability was greater than the treatment effect on overall relapse rate, and occurred despite similar relapse severity across treatment groups.

Conclusions

The beneficial effect of peginterferon beta-1a on risk of CDP may be attributable to the combination of an overall reduction in the risk of relapses and improvement in recovery from relapses, thus limiting further disability progression.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00906399

An update on the evidence base for peginterferon β1a in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Peginterferon β1a is a modified form of interferon β1a with a polyethylene glycol (PEG) group attached to the α-amino group of the N terminus of the interferon molecule. This modification alters the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of interferon β1a, enabling reduced frequency of dosing and may also result in reduced immunogenicity of the interferon β1a molecule. The efficacy of peginterferon β1a 125 µg administered subcutaneously every 2 or 4 weeks was demonstrated at the end of the placebo-controlled period in the phase III ADVANCE study; both dosing regimens met their primary endpoint of reducing annualized relapse rate (ARR) compared with placebo. Peginterferon β1a administered every 2 weeks resulted in a more robust treatment effect on ARR, sustained disability progression and magnetic resonance imaging endpoints (new or enlarging T2 lesions and gadolinium-enhanced lesions) than peginterferon β1a every 4 weeks. Further reductions in the ARR with additional positive impact on magnetic resonance imaging outcomes were noted in year 2 of the ADVANCE study with the every 2-week dosing regimen. An adverse-effect profile similar to other interferon β formulations coupled with the advantage of a significant reduction in the number of injections, could lead to improved long-term adherence to peginterferon β1a. We review the evidence base for the role of peginterferon β1a in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.