Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing ocrelizumab with other treatments for relapsing multiple sclerosis

Brain volume loss in relapsing multiple sclerosis: indirect treatment comparisons of available disease-modifying therapies

BACKGROUND

Brain volume loss (BVL) has been identified as a predictor of disability progression in relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). As many available disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) have shown an effect on slowing BVL, this is becoming an emerging clinical endpoint in RMS clinical trials.

METHODS

In this study, a systematic literature review was conducted to identify BVL results from randomized controlled trials of DMTs in RMS. Indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) were conducted to estimate the relative efficacy of DMTs on BVL using two approaches: a model-based meta-analysis (MBMA) with adjustment for measurement timepoint and DMT dosage, and a network meta-analysis (NMA).

RESULTS

In the MBMA, DMTs associated with significantly reduced BVL versus placebo at two years included fingolimod (mean difference [MD] = 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.15 - 0.36), ozanimod (MD = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.12 - 0.41), teriflunomide (MD = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.20 - 0.55), alemtuzumab (MD = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.10 - 0.67) and ponesimod (MD = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.48 - 0.95), whereas interferons and natalizumab performed the most poorly. The results of NMA analysis were generally comparable with those of the MBMA.

CONCLUSIONS

Limitations of these analyses included the potential for confounding due to pseudoatrophy, and a lack of long-term clinical data for BVL. Our findings suggest that important differences in BVL may exist between DMTs. Continued investigation of BVL in studies of RMS is important to complement traditional disability endpoints, and to foster a better understanding of the mechanisms by which DMTs can slow BVL.

Five-year efficacy outcomes of ocrelizumab in relapsing multiple sclerosis: A propensity-matched comparison of the OPERA studies with other disease-modifying therapies in real-world lines of treatments

Background

Clinical trials comparing the efficacy of ocrelizumab (OCR) with other disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) other than interferon (IFN) β-1a in relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) are lacking.

Objectives

To compare the treatment effect of OCR vs six DMTs' (IFN β-1a, glatiramer acetate, fingolimod, dimethyl fumarate, teriflunomide, natalizumab) treatment pathways used in clinical practice by combining clinical trial and real-world data.

Methods

Patient-level data from OPERA trials and open-label extension phase, and from the German NeuroTransData (NTD) MS registry, were used to build 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM) cohorts controlling for seven baseline covariates, including brain imaging activity. Efficacy outcomes were time to first relapse and time to 24-week confirmed disability progression over 5.5 years of follow-up. Intention-to-treat analysis using all outcome data irrespective of treatment switch was applied.

Results

The analyses included 611 OPERA patients and 7141 NTD patients. We built 12 paired-matched cohorts (six for each outcome, two for each DMT) to compare efficacy of OCR in OPERA with each DMT treatment pathway in NTD. Post-matching, baseline covariates and PS were well balanced (standardized mean difference <.2 for all cohorts). Over 5.5 years, patients treated with OCR showed a statistically significant reduction in the risk of relapse (hazard ratios [HRs] .30 to .54) and disability progression (HRs .51 to .67) compared with all index therapies and their treatment switching pathways in NTD. Treatment switch and/or discontinuation occurred frequently in NTD cohorts.

Conclusion

OCR demonstrates superiority in controlling relapses and disability progression in RMS compared with real-world treatment pathways over a 5.5-year period. These analyses suggest that high-efficacy DMTs and high treatment persistence are critical to achieve greatest clinical benefit in RMS.

Registration

OPERA I (NCT01247324), OPERA II (NCT01412333).

Perspectives on the clinical use of anti-amyloid therapy for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease: Insights from the fields of cancer, rheumatology, and neurology

Introduction

The advent of disease-modifying therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD) has raised many questions and debates in the field as to the clinical benefits, risks, and costs of such therapies. The controversies have resulted in the perception that many clinicians are apprehensive about prescribing these medications to their patient populations. There also remains widespread uncertainty as to the economic impact, cost benefit ratio, and safety oversight for use of these medications in standard clinical care settings.

Methods

To contextualize such issues, the present study compared anti-amyloid biologic therapy (lecanemab) to four commonly used biologic agents in other fields, including trastuzumab for breast cancer, bevacizumab for lung cancer, etanercept for rheumatoid arthritis, and ocrelizumab for multiple sclerosis.

Results

The data presented demonstrate comparable costs, clinical benefits, and risks for these biologic agents in their disparate disease states.

Discussion

These results provide context for the costs, clinical benefits, and safety regarding the mainstream use of anti-amyloid biologic agents for the prevention of cognitive loss. While the era of disease-modifying therapies for AD is now in its infancy, there is an expectation that these discoveries will be followed by improved therapies and combination treatments leading to greater efficacy in ameliorating the clinical trajectory of AD.

Highlights

Anti-amyloid therapy costs are comparable to other commonly used biologics.Anti-amyloid therapy efficacy is comparable to other commonly used biologics.Anti-amyloid therapy safety is compatible with other commonly used biologics.

Long-Term Safety of Teriflunomide in Multiple Sclerosis Patients: Results of Prospective Comparative Studies in Three European Countries

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Teriflunomide is a disease-modifying therapy (DMT) for multiple sclerosis (MS). This post authorisation safety study assessed risks of adverse events of special interest (AESI) associated with teriflunomide use.

METHODS

Secondary use of individual data from the Danish MS Registry (DMSR), the French National Health Data System (SNDS), the Belgian national database of health care claims (AIM-IMA) and the Belgian Treatments in MS Registry (Beltrims). We included patients treated with a DMT at the date of teriflunomide reimbursement or initiating another DMT. Adjusted hazard rates (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals were derived from Cox models with time-dependent exposure comparing teriflunomide treatment with another DMT.

RESULTS

Of 81 620 patients (72% women) included in the cohort, 22 324 (27%) were treated with teriflunomide. After a median follow-up of 4 years, teriflunomide use compared to other DMT was not associated with a risk of all-cause mortality, severe infection, pneumoniae, herpes zoster reactivation, pancreatitis, cardiovascular condition and cancers. For opportunistic infections, aHR for teriflunomide versus other DMT was 2.4 (1.2-4.8) in SNDS, which was not bound to a particular opportunistic agent. The aHR was 2.0 (1.1-3.7) for renal failures in the SNDS, but no association was found in other data sources. A total of 187 SNDS patients had a history of renal failure prior to cohort entry. None of these patients (0%) had a renal failure recurrence when treated with teriflunomide for 19 (13%) recurrences reported for patients on another DMT.

DISCUSSION

We found no evidence that teriflunomide use would be associated with an increased risk of AESI. Trial Registration EUPAS register: EU PAS 19610.

Impact of Ocrelizumab on Disease Progression, Memory Improvement, and Quality of Life in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Longitudinal MRI and Clinical Criteria Analysis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, progressive neurological disorder that significantly impacts quality of life and functionality. Ocrelizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CD20-positive B cells, has emerged as a treatment for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). This study aimed to assess the impact of ocrelizumab on disease progression and quality of life over a longitudinal course, utilizing clinical criteria and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) analyses. Conducted at the Neurology Department of Pius Brinzeu Clinical Emergency Hospital in Western Romania from 2020 to 2023, this observational study enrolled 93 patients with RRMS who commenced ocrelizumab therapy. The study employed the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and MRI to evaluate disease progression, while quality of life was assessed using the World Health Organisation Quality of Life (WHOQOL) questionnaire, Beck Depression Index (BDI), and MOCA scales. Significant improvements were observed post-treatment. EDSS scores decreased from 4.61 to 4.08 (p = 0.038), indicating reduced disability. MRI analyses showed a substantial decrease in expansive lesions (from 67.74% to 26.88%, p < 0.001) and an increase in stationary lesions (from 32.26% to 73.12%, p < 0.001). Quality of life improvements were notable in the physical (from 58.42 to 64.84, p = 0.005) and environmental domains (from 63.21 to 68.44, p = 0.033). Cognitive functions, assessed via Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA), showed a significant total score increase from 20.38 to 22.30 (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed more pronounced effects in females and younger patients, with a significant reduction in depressive symptoms measured by BDI scores (from 14.35 to 11.62, p = 0.003). Ocrelizumab significantly reduced disease activity and disability in RRMS patients, as demonstrated by improvements in EDSS scores and MRI findings. Quality of life and cognitive functions also showed considerable enhancements. These findings support ocrelizumab's efficacy in not only managing MS symptoms but also improving overall patient well-being.

Comparative efficacy of ofatumumab versus oral therapies for relapsing multiple sclerosis patients using propensity score analyses and simulated treatment comparisons

Background

Evidence from network meta-analyses (NMAs) and real-world propensity score (PS) analyses suggest monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) offer a therapeutic advantage over currently available oral therapies and, therefore, warrant consideration as a distinct group of high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). This is counter to the current perception of these therapies by some stakeholders, including payers.

Objectives

A multifaceted indirect treatment comparison (ITC) approach was undertaken to clarify the relative efficacy of mAbs and oral therapies.

Design

Two ITC methods that use individual patient data (IPD) to adjust for between-trial differences, PS analyses and simulated treatment comparisons (STCs), were used to compare the mAb ofatumumab versus the oral therapies cladribine, fingolimod, and ozanimod.

Data sources and methods

As IPD were available for trials of ofatumumab and fingolimod, PS analyses were conducted. Given summary-level data were available for cladribine, fingolimod, and ozanimod trials, STCs were conducted between ofatumumab and each of these oral therapies. Three efficacy outcomes were compared: annualized relapse rate (ARR), 3-month confirmed disability progression (3mCDP), and 6-month CDP (6mCDP).

Results

The PS analyses demonstrated ofatumumab was statistically superior to fingolimod for ARR and time to 3mCDP but not time to 6mCDP. In STCs, ofatumumab was statistically superior in reducing ARR and decreasing the proportion of patients with 3mCDP compared with cladribine, fingolimod, and ozanimod and in decreasing the proportion with 6mCP compared with fingolimod and ozanimod. These findings were largely consistent with recently published NMAs that identified mAb therapies as the most efficacious DMTs for RMS.

Conclusion

Complementary ITC methods showed ofatumumab was superior to cladribine, fingolimod, and ozanimod in lowering relapse rates and delaying disability progression among patients with RMS. Our study supports the therapeutic superiority of mAbs over currently available oral DMTs for RMS and the delineation of mAbs as high-efficacy therapies.

Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of disease-modifying drugs of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, autoimmune, and inflammatory disease. The economic burden of MS is substantial, and the high cost of Disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) prices are the main drivers of healthcare expenditures. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of DMDs for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

MATERIALS AND METHOD

Searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase. The search covered articles published between May 2001 and May 2023. Studies that were written in English and Persian and examined the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of DMDs in patients with MS were included in our review. Data extraction was guided by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist, and the quality of economic evaluations was assessed using the Quality of Health Economics Studies Instrument (QHES). All costs were converted to 2020 U.S. dollars using Purchasing Power Parity (PPP).

RESULTS

The search yielded 1589 studies, and 49 studies were eligible for inclusion. The studies were mainly based on a European setting. Most studies employed Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness. The lowest and highest numerical value of outcome measures were -1,623,918 and 2,297,141.53, respectively. Furthermore, the lowest and highest numerical value of the cost of DMDs of RRMS were $180.67, and $1474840.19, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of all studies, it can be concluded that for the treatment of patients with MS, care-oriented strategies should be preferred to drug strategies. Also, among the drug strategies with different prescribing methods, oral disease-modifying drugs of RRMS should be preferred to injectable drugs and intravenous infusions.

Comparing infusion-related reactions of the first full dose (600 mg) biosimilar ocrelizumab administration with the standard divided protocol in multiple sclerosis patients: a randomized controlled trial study

BACKGROUND

Ocrelizumab is a humanized antiCD20, thought to be a highly effective disease-modifying therapy (DMT). Its most frequent adverse effects are infusion-related reactions (IRRs). To reduce these reactions, the first dose of ocrelizumab is administered as two 300 mg infusions separated by two weeks. However, in the phase II trial of ocrelizumab, severe IRRs were not significantly different between two doses of 600 mg dose (two separate 300 mg doses) and 2000 mg dose (two separate 1000 mg doses). We compared the IRRs in undivided full (one 600 mg) and divided (two 300 mg) doses of ocrelizumab which is the standard protocol.

METHODS

MS patients (relapsing or primary progressive MS) who are selected to receive ocrelizumab by neurologist or MS fellowship were enrolled in an open-label randomized controlled trial. Iranian biosimilar of the drug (Xacrel® by Cinnagen, approved by the Iranian Food and Drug Administration in 2021) was used. The participants received the first dose of ocrelizumab as either one 600 mg dose in one session or two 300 mg doses in two weeks apart. IRRs during or in the first 24 h after infusion were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 332 participants, 150 received two 300 mg doses, and 182 received one 600 mg dose (by random selection). Life-threatening adverse effects were not observed in both groups. Overnight admission or permanent drug discontinuation was not needed. Temporary drug discontinuation was significantly higher in the one 600 mg dose group (p-value < 0.001). During the infusions, malaise (p-value: 0.003), skin reactions (p-value: 0.04), throat swelling (p-value: 0.03), and dyspnea (p-value: 0.01) were significantly increased in the intervention group. However, in the first 24 h, there was no significant difference between two different treatment protocols (one 600 mg dose or two 300 mg doses) in the onset of IRRS (p-value: 0.12).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest one 600 mg dose of ocrelizumab administration for the first dose is relatively safe. With some protocol modifications, it could lead to fewer patient referrals, saving time and cost and improvement the access for patients.

Benefits of sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators in relapsing MS estimated with a treatment sequence model

BACKGROUND

Three sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor (S1PR) modulators are currently available as disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing MS in the Netherlands (i.e. fingolimod, ozanimod and ponesimod). We aimed to identify which S1PR modulator yields the highest benefit from a health-economic and societal perspective during a patient's lifespan.

METHODS

Incorporating Dutch DMT list prices, we used the ErasmusMC/iMTA MS model to compare DMT sequences, including S1PR modulators and eight other DMT classes, for treatment-naïve patients with relapsing MS in terms of health outcomes (number of lifetime relapses, time to Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) 6, lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) and cost-effectiveness (net health benefit (NHB)). We estimated the influence of list price and EDSS progression on cost-effectiveness outcomes.

RESULTS

In deterministic and probabilistic analysis, DMT sequences with ponesimod have lower lifetime costs and higher QALYs resulting in a higher average NHB compared to sequences with other S1PR modulators. Ponesimod remains the most cost-effective S1PR modulator when EDSS progression is class-averaged. Given the variable effects on disability progression, list price reductions could make fingolimod but not ozanimod more cost-effective than ponesimod.

CONCLUSION

Our model favours ponesimod among the S1PR modulators for the treatment of relapsing MS. This implies that prioritizing ponesimod over other S1PR modulators translates into a more efficacious spending of national healthcare budget without reducing benefit for people with MS. Prioritizing cost-effective choices when counselling patients contributes to affordable and accessible MS care.

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.

Comparative efficacy of therapies for relapsing multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Aim: To assess the relative efficacy of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) including newer therapies (ozanimod, ponesimod, ublituximab) using network meta-analysis (NMA). Materials & methods: Bayesian NMAs for annualised relapse rate (ARR) and time to 3-month and 6-month confirmed disability progression (3mCDP and 6mCDP) were conducted. Results: For each outcome, the three most efficacious treatments versus placebo were monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies: alemtuzumab, ofatumumab, and ublituximab for ARR; alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab, and ofatumumab for 3mCDP; and alemtuzumab, natalizumab, and either ocrelizumab or ofatumumab (depending on the CDP definition used for included ofatumumab trials) for 6mCDP. Conclusion: The most efficacious DMTs for RMS were mAb therapies. Of the newer therapies, only ublituximab ranked among the three most efficacious treatments (for ARR).

Cost-utility analysis of multiple sclerosis rehabilitation in Iran

BACKGROUND

Rehabilitation of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is associated with various clinical, social and economic outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of MS multidisciplinary rehabilitation in Iran.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

An economic evaluation was conducted using a Markov model designed to reflect the natural course of the disease and interventions. Parameters and variables were extracted from available evidence, and costs and outcomes were calculated from the social perspective. The base-case analysis considered a 5-year time horizon. Costs were estimated based on approved national standards for MS rehabilitation. Sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

The average cost of the rehabilitation strategy was higher compared to the non-rehabilitation strategy, but it resulted in higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) values. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was found to be $2,845.8 per QALY, indicating that the rehabilitation strategy is cost-effective. In the deterministic sensitivity analysis, extending the time horizon to 10 years made the rehabilitation strategy a dominant choice. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis results were consistent with the base-case findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The MS multidisciplinary rehabilitation proved to be a cost-effective strategy; however, the results were sensitive to the input values of the model. Increasing the time horizon increased the probability of rehabilitation being cost-effective.

B cell targeted therapies in inflammatory autoimmune disease of the central nervous system

Cumulative evidence along several lines indicates that B cells play an important role in the pathological course of multiple sclerosis (MS), neuromyelitisoptica spectrum disorders (NMOSD) and related CNS diseases. This has prompted extensive research in exploring the utility of targeting B cells to contain disease activity in these disorders. In this review, we first recapitulate the development of B cells from their origin in the bone marrow to their migration to the periphery, including the expression of therapy-relevant surface immunoglobulin isotypes. Not only the ability of B cells to produce cytokines and immunoglobulins seems to be essential in driving neuroinflammation, but also their regulatory functions strongly impact pathobiology. We then critically assess studies of B cell depleting therapies, including CD20 and CD19 targeting monoclonal antibodies, as well as the new class of B cell modulating substances, Bruton´s tyrosinekinase (BTK) inhibitors, in MS, NMOSD and MOGAD.

The consequences of switching Gilenya to generics for Fingolimod

BACKGROUND

On May 2017, two generic drugs for fingolimod were introduced into the market in Israel, and most MS patients treated with Gilenya® (Novartis) were switched to fingolimod (Teva), or to Finolim (Rafa). In this study we analyzed the consequences of switching to generic fingolimod in a single MS center.

METHODS

Study population included relapsing MS patients who were treated with Gilenya® for at least two year before May 2017, switched to generic fingolimod and remained on treatment for at least 2 years thereafter. Data before and after the switch were compared.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria (F = 20, RRMS=20, SPMS=7, average age 49±11.4 years, average disease duration=16.6 ± 7.6 years). Seventeen patients had to be switched back to the original Gilenya® due to intolerable new or worsening clinical adverse events (n = 9), clinical relapse (n = 1), clinical relapse with adverse events (n = 3), elevation of liver enzymes > X3 ULN (n = 3) and elevation of amylase (n = 1). Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score increased in 4 patients during the year before the switch, and in 12 patients during the year of treatment with generic fingolimod (p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

The tolerability, retention rate and probably efficacy of generic fingolimod seems to be lower than the original Gilenya®.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Ocrelizumab for the Treatment of Relapsing and Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis in Portugal

OBJECTIVES

Ocrelizumab demonstrated significant clinical benefit for the treatment of relapsing (RMS) and primary progressive (PPMS) multiple sclerosis (MS), an incurable disease characterized by disability progression. This study evaluated the clinical and economic impact of ocrelizumab relative to current clinical practice, including other disease-modifying therapies (DMT), available in Portugal.

METHODS

Markov models for MS were adapted to estimate the impact of ocrelizumab across three patient populations: treatment-naïve RMS, previously treated RMS, and PPMS. Health states were defined according to the Expanded Disability Status Scale. For RMS, the model further captured the occurrence of relapses and progression to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). A lifetime time-horizon and Portuguese societal perspective were adopted.

RESULTS

For RMS patients, ocrelizumab was estimated to maximize the expected time (years) without progression to SPMS (10.50) relative to natalizumab (10.10), dimethyl fumarate (8.64), teriflunomide (8.39), fingolimod (8.38), interferon β-1a (8.33) and glatiramer acetate (8.18). As the most effective option, with quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains between 0.3 and 1.2, ocrelizumab was found to be cost-saving relative to natalizumab and fingolimod, and presented incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) below €16,720/QALY relative to the remaining DMT. For PPMS patients, the ICER of ocrelizumab versus best supportive care was estimated at €78,858/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Ocrelizumab provides important health benefits for RMS and PPMS patients, comparing favourably with other widely used therapies. In RMS, ocrelizumab was revealed to be either cost-saving or have costs-per-QALY likely below commonly accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds. In PPMS, ocrelizumab fills a clear clinical gap in the current clinical practice. Overall, ocrelizumab is expected to provide good value for money in addressing the need of MS patients.

The comparative effectiveness of fingolimod, natalizumab, and ocrelizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Fingolimod, natalizumab, and ocrelizumab are commonly used in the second-line treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). However, these have only been compared in observational studies, not in controlled trials, with limited and inconclusive results being reported. A comparison of their effect on relapse and disability in a real-world setting is therefore needed.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of fingolimod, natalizumab, and ocrelizumab in reducing disease activity in RRMS.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective observational study was carried out with prospectively collected data from 16 centers. All consecutive RRMS patients treated with fingolimod, natalizumab, and ocrelizumab were included. Data for relapses, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores, and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were collected. Patients were matched using propensity scores. Annualized relapse rates (ARR), time to first relapse, and disability accumulation were compared.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching retained 736 patients in the fingolimod versus 370 in the natalizumab groups, 762 in the fingolimod versus 434 in the ocrelizumab groups, and 310 in the natalizumab versus 310 in the ocrelizumab groups for final analyses. Mean ARR decreased markedly from baseline after treatment in all three treatment groups. Mean on-treatment ARR was lower in natalizumab-treated patients (0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.07-0.12) than in those treated with fingolimod (0.17, 0.15-0.19, p<0.001), ocrelizumab (0.08, 0.06-0.11), and fingolimod (0.14, 0.12-0.16, p=0.001). No significant difference was observed in mean on-treatment ARR between patients treated with natalizumab (0.08, 0.06-0.11) and ocrelizumab (0.09, 0.07-0.12, p=0.54). Compared to fingolimod, the natalizumab and ocrelizumab groups exhibited a higher percentage of relapse-free patients and a lower percentage of MRI-active patients at year 1. No significance differences in disability accumulation were determined between the therapies.

CONCLUSION

Natalizumab and ocrelizumab exhibited similar effects on relapse control, and both were associated with better relapse control than fingolimod. The effects of the three therapies on disability outcomes were similar.

Comparative efficacy and safety of disease-modifying therapies in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, 19 disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have been approved for the treatment of patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (RMS).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DMTs in adults with RMS.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Food and Drug Administration, and European Medicines Agency websites for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (from inception to July 2021). Eligible RCTs evaluated approved treatments for RMS as monotherapy and reported at least one of the primary outcome measures of interest. The primary outcome was efficacy (annualized relapse rate and 12-week confirmed disability progression) and safety (serious adverse events [AEs] and discontinuation due to AEs). We assessed the risk of bias (RoB) of included studies using the Cochrane RoB tool version 2.0 (https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d5928) for RCTs. Surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) was used to rank therapies and to assess quality of general evidence, respectively. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to rank therapies and to assess quality of general evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 43 records represent 45 RCTs selected for network meta-analysis. In total, 30,720 participants (median of 732; interquartile range: 248-931) were included, of which 67% were female. By SUCRA analysis, alemtuzumab (94.3%) presented the highest probability of being the best alternative for annualized relapse rate, whereas ofatumumab (93.5%) presented the highest probability of being the best alternative for 12-week confirmed disability progression. Interferon beta-1b subcutaneous (87.0%) presented the highest probability of the best safety among all DMTs for serious AEs, whereas alemtuzumab (92.4%) presented the highest probability of the best safety among all DMTs for discontinuation due to AEs.

CONCLUSION

Network meta-analysis shows that alemtuzumab and ofatumumab present the highest efficacy among DMTs. Because there is little difference between these probabilities for many treatments, health professionals should use clinical shared decision making when formulating treatment plans with patients.

Efficacy, safety and patient reported outcomes in patients with active relapsing multiple sclerosis treated with ocrelizumab: Final results from the PRO-MSACTIVE study

BACKGROUND

Ocrelizumab, a humanized anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, has been approved in Europe for the treatment of adult patients with active relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) and primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS), on the basis of previous phase III studies. However, limited data were available on ocrelizumab efficacy in RMS according to the Lublin definition of activity (clinical and/or imaging features) used in the current drug label. The PRO-MSACTIVE study was thus designed to provide additional data on ocrelizumab efficacy according to this definition, and also on safety and patient reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

PRO-MSACTIVE is a national, multicenter, open-label, single-arm phase IV French study, conducted in patients with active RMS (relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, RRMS, or secondary progressive multiple sclerosis, SPMS). The primary endpoint, which was assessed at week (W) 48, was defined as the proportion of patients free of disease activity (defined by no relapses and no T1 gadolinium-enhancing nor new and/or enlarging T2 lesions using brain MRI). Disease activity, disability and PROs using 6 questionnaires for disease severity, quality of life, impact on work productivity, and treatment satisfaction were described at W24 and W48. Adverse events were described until W72.

RESULTS

Among the 422 analyzed patients (RRMS: 376, SPMS: 46), 63.3% (95% CI [58.5%; 67.9%]) were free of disease activity at W48 (RRMS: 62.2% [57.1%; 67.2%], SPMS: 71.7% [56.5%; 84.0%]). A total of 358 patients (84.8%; RRMS: 84.6%, SPMS: 87.0%) were relapse-free up to W48, and the overall adjusted annualized relapse rate was 0.14 (RRMS: 0.15, SPMS: 0.09). Overall, 67.8% of patients (RRMS: 66.8%, SPMS: 76.1%) had no evidence of MRI activity (no T1 gadolinium-enhancing lesions [83.4%] and no new/enlarging T2 lesions [75.1%]); 58.5% of patients (RRMS: 57.7%, SPMS: 65.2%) achieved No Evidence of Disease Activity (NEDA: no relapses, no confirmed disability progression, and no MRI activity) at W48. All PRO scores were stable between the first dose of ocrelizumab and W48 and better outcomes were seen for patients having an EDSS score ≥4. Overall, 89.3% of patients reported adverse events, 62.3% adverse events assessed as related to ocrelizumab, and 8.5% serious adverse events. No serious infusion-related reactions, opportunistic infections, progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, nor deaths were reported. No new safety signal was identified.

CONCLUSION

These data confirm the efficacy of ocrelizumab in a pragmatic setting and its favorable benefit-risk profile in patients with RMS. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03589105; EudraCT identifier: 2018-000780-91).

Comparing switch to ocrelizumab, cladribine or natalizumab after fingolimod treatment cessation in multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

To compare the effectiveness and treatment persistence of ocrelizumab, cladribine and natalizumab in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis switching from fingolimod.

METHODS

Using data from MSBase registry, this multicentre cohort study included subjects who had used fingolimod for ≥6 months and then switched to ocrelizumab, cladribine or natalizumab within 3 months after fingolimod discontinuation. We analysed relapse and disability outcomes after balancing covariates using an inverse-probability-treatment-weighting method. Propensity scores for the three treatments were obtained using multinomial-logistic regression. Due to the smaller number of cladribine users, comparisons of disability outcomes were limited to natalizumab and ocrelizumab.

RESULTS

Overall, 1045 patients switched to ocrelizumab (n=445), cladribine (n=76) or natalizumab (n=524) after fingolimod. The annualised relapse rate (ARR) for ocrelizumab was 0.07, natalizumab 0.11 and cladribine 0.25. Compared with natalizumab, the ARR ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 0.67 (0.47 to 0.96) for ocrelizumab and 2.31 (1.30 to 4.10) for cladribine; the hazard ratio (95% CI) for time to first relapse was 0.57 (0.40 to 0.83) for ocrelizumab and 1.18 (0.47 to 2.93) for cladribine. Ocrelizumab users had an 89% lower discontinuation rate (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.20) than natalizumab, but also a 51% lower probability of confirmed disability improvement (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.73). There was no difference in disability accumulation.

CONCLUSION

After fingolimod cessation, ocrelizumab and natalizumab were more effective in reducing relapses than cladribine. Due to the low ARRs in all three treatment groups, additional observation time is required to determine if statistical difference in ARRs results in long-term disability differences.

Simulated treatment comparison of efficacy outcomes for ofatumumab in ASCLEPIOS I/II versus ocrelizumab in OPERA I/II for the treatment of patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Ofatumumab is a subcutaneously administered anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (MoAb) therapy that has been evaluated in two identically designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), ASCLEPIOS I (NCT02792218) and ASCLEPIOS II (NCT02792231), in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). Ocrelizumab is another anti-CD20 MoAb therapy, administered intravenously, that has been evaluated in two identically designed RCTs, OPERA I (NCT01247324) and OPERA II (NCT01412333) in RMS. Given the absence of published RCTs with head-to-head comparisons between these MoAbs, this study assessed the indirect comparative efficacy of ofatumumab and ocrelizumab.

METHODS

Given the availability of individual patient data for ASCLEPIOS I/II and summary-level data for OPERA I/II, simulated treatment comparisons were used to assess the comparative efficacy of ofatumumab versus ocrelizumab while adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics between trials. Comparative efficacy was estimated for the proportion of patients with 3- and 6-month confirmed disability progression (CDP) and for annualized relapse rate (ARR). Exploratory analyses were conducted for the outcome of no evidence of disease activity based on three parameters (NEDA-3) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes (proportion of patients with gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions and brain volume change).

RESULTS

Although comparative results were not significant for 3-month CDP (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.90 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-1.42]) or 6-month CDP (HR: 0.84 [95% CI: 0.47-1.49]), ofatumumab showed a significant improvement in ARR (rate ratio: 0.60 [95% CI: 0.43-0.84]) compared with ocrelizumab. Significantly favorable results were also associated with ofatumumab for NEDA-3 and MRI outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Ofatumumab was associated with more favorable efficacy results compared with ocrelizumab for clinical, NEDA-3, and MRI outcomes.

Disease modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis: benefit and acceptability

Disease modifying therapies are available for the treatment of relapse remitting multiple sclerosis, making relapses less common and severe. A Cochrane systematic review was undertaken to compare their benefit and acceptability. This article summarises and appraises the review evidence.

Ocrelizumab for multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Ocrelizumab is a humanised anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody developed for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). It was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in March 2017 for using in adults with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) and primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS). Ocrelizumab is the only disease-modifying therapy (DMT) approved for PPMS. In November 2017, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also approved ocrelizumab as the first drug for people with early PPMS. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the benefits, harms, and tolerability of ocrelizumab in people with MS.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits, harms, and tolerability of ocrelizumab in people with RRMS and PPMS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and two trials registers on 8 October 2021. We screened reference lists, contacted experts, and contacted the main authors of studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults diagnosed with RRMS or PPMS according to the McDonald criteria, comparing ocrelizumab alone or associated with other medications, at the approved dose of 600 mg every 24 weeks for any duration, versus placebo or any other active drug therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Four RCTs met our selection criteria. The overall population included 2551 participants; 1370 treated with ocrelizumab 600 mg and 1181 controls. Among the controls, 298 participants received placebo and 883 received interferon beta-1a. The treatment duration was 24 weeks in one study, 96 weeks in two studies, and at least 120 weeks in one study. One study was at high risk of allocation concealment and blinding of participants and personnel; all four studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data. For RRMS, compared with interferon beta-1a, ocrelizumab was associated with: 1. lower relapse rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 0.73; 2 studies, 1656 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); 2. a lower number of participants with disability progression (hazard ratio (HR) 0.60, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.84; 2 studies, 1656 participants; low-certainty evidence); 3. little to no difference in the number of participants with any adverse event (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.04; 2 studies, 1651 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); 4. little to no difference in the number of participants with any serious adverse event (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.11; 2 studies, 1651 participants; low-certainty evidence); 5. a lower number of participants experiencing treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.91; 2 studies, 1651 participants; low-certainty evidence); 6. a lower number of participants with gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.35; 2 studies, 1656 participants; low-certainty evidence); 7. a lower number of participants with new or enlarging T2-hyperintense lesions on MRI (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.69; 2 studies, 1656 participants; low-certainty evidence) at 96 weeks. For PPMS, compared with placebo, ocrelizumab was associated with: 1. a lower number of participants with disability progression (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.98; 1 study, 731 participants; low-certainty evidence); 2. a higher number of participants with any adverse events (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.11; 1 study, 725 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); 3. little to no difference in the number of participants with any serious adverse event (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.23; 1 study, 725 participants; low-certainty evidence); 4. little to no difference in the number of participants experiencing treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.75; 1 study, 725 participants; low-certainty evidence) for at least 120 weeks. There were no data for number of participants with gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions on MRI and number of participants with new or enlarging T2-hyperintense lesions on MRI.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For people with RRMS, ocrelizumab probably results in a large reduction in relapse rate and little to no difference in adverse events when compared with interferon beta-1a at 96 weeks (moderate-certainty evidence). Ocrelizumab may result in a large reduction in disability progression, treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events, number of participants with gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions on MRI, and number of participants with new or enlarging T2-hyperintense lesions on MRI, and may result in little to no difference in serious adverse events (low-certainty evidence). For people with PPMS, ocrelizumab probably results in a higher rate of adverse events when compared with placebo for at least 120 weeks (moderate-certainty evidence). Ocrelizumab may result in a reduction in disability progression and little to no difference in serious adverse events and treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events (low-certainty evidence). Ocrelizumab was well tolerated clinically; the most common adverse events were infusion-related reactions and nasopharyngitis, and urinary tract and upper respiratory tract infections.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing the Safety of Natalizumab, Ocrelizumab, and Alemtuzumab in Treating Relapsing–Remitting, Primary Progressive, and Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis

Three monoclonal antibodies—natalizumab (NTZ), ocrelizumab (OCR), and alemtuzumab (ALM)—are the mainstays for the treatment of both relapsing and progressive forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). Here, their safety in patients with MS is analyzed and compared for rational use, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. All clinical studies published between 2016 and 2020 with the primary outcome of the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) with the use of NTZ, OCR, and ALM in the treatment of MS were systematically searched in the PubMed database. In this review, the percentage of patients reporting AEs was calculated and compared. The most common AEs associated with the use of NTZ, OCR, and ALM were infection and infestation. The percentage of patients reporting urinary tract infection, upper respiratory tract infection, and herpes was 16% using natalizumab, 7% using natalizumab and ocrelizumab, and 2% with ocrelizumab, respectively. The most common AEs, such as rashes, pyrexia, and influenza, were reported with ocrelizumab and alemtuzumab. Additionally, alemtuzumab was associated with immune thrombocytopenia (2%), respiratory infections (7%), and thyroid dysfunction (43%). All these data outcomes show that of the three monoclonal antibodies, natalizumab and ocrelizumab were associated with a reduced incidence of adverse events, making them a safer choice for MS.

Comparative Effectiveness of Natalizumab Versus Anti-CD20 in Highly Active Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis After Fingolimod Withdrawal

In France, two therapeutic strategies can be offered after fingolimod (FNG) withdrawal to highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients: natalizumab (NTZ) or anti-CD20. We compared the effectiveness of these two strategies as a switch for FNG within the OFSEP database. The primary endpoint was the time to first relapse. Other outcomes were the relapse rates over 3-month periods, time to worsening the EDSS score, proportion of patients with worsened 24-month MRI, time to treatment discontinuation, and incidence rates of serious adverse events. The dynamics of event rates over time were modeled using multidimensional penalized splines, allowing the possibility to model the effects of covariates in a flexible way, considering non-linearity and interactions. A total of 740 patients were included (337 under anti-CD20 and 403 under NTZ). There was no difference between the two treatments regarding the dynamic of the first occurrence of relapse, with a monthly probability of 5.0% at initiation and 1.0% after 6 months. The rate of EDSS worsening increased in both groups until 6 months and then decreased. No difference in the proportion of patients with new T2 lesions at 24 months was observed. After 18 months of follow-up, a greater risk of NTZ discontinuation was found compared to anti-CD20. This study showed no difference between NTZ and anti-CD20 after the FNG switch regarding the clinical and radiological activity. The effect of these treatments was optimal after 6 months and there was more frequent discontinuation of NTZ after 18 months, probably mainly related to JC virus seroconversions.

Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Natalizumab and Fingolimod in Patients with Inadequate Response to Disease-Modifying Therapies in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

Patients with highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis inadequately responding to first-line therapies (interferon-based therapies, glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, and teriflunomide, known collectively as "BRACETD") often switch to natalizumab or fingolimod.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to estimate the comparative effectiveness of switching to natalizumab or fingolimod or within BRACETD using real-world data and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of switching to natalizumab versus fingolimod using a United Kingdom (UK) third-party payer perspective.

METHODS

Real-world data were obtained from MSBase for patients relapsing on BRACETD in the year before switching to natalizumab or fingolimod or within BRACETD. Three-way-multinomial-propensity-score-matched cohorts were identified, and comparisons between treatment groups were conducted for annualised relapse rate (ARR) and 6-month-confirmed disability worsening (CDW6M) and improvement (CDI6M). Results were applied in a cost-effectiveness model over a lifetime horizon using a published Markov structure with health states based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale. Other model parameters were obtained from the UK MS Survey 2015, published literature, and publicly available UK sources.

RESULTS

The MSBase analysis found a significant reduction in ARR (rate ratio [RR] = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.72; p < 0.001) and an increase in CDI6M (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.67; 95% CI 1.30-2.15; p < 0.001) for switching to natalizumab compared with BRACETD. For switching to fingolimod, the reduction in ARR (RR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.81-1.03; p = 0.133) and increase in CDI6M (HR = 1.30; 95% CI 0.99-1.72; p = 0.058) compared with BRACETD were not significant. Switching to natalizumab was associated with a significant reduction in ARR (RR = 0.70; 95% CI 0.62-0.79; p < 0.001) and an increase in CDI6M (HR = 1.28; 95% CI 1.01-1.62; p = 0.040) compared to switching to fingolimod. No evidence of difference in CDW6M was found between treatment groups. Natalizumab dominated (higher quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] and lower costs) fingolimod in the base-case cost-effectiveness analysis (0.453 higher QALYs and £20,843 lower costs per patient). Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

This novel real-world analysis suggests a clinical benefit for therapy escalation to natalizumab versus fingolimod based on comparative effectiveness results, translating to higher QALYs and lower costs for UK patients inadequately responding to BRACETD.

Ocrelizumab: A Review in Multiple Sclerosis

Ocrelizumab (Ocrevus®) is an intravenously administered, humanized anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of adults with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (RMS) or primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS). The efficacy of ocrelizumab in reducing relapse rates and disease activity in patients with RMS was demonstrated in pivotal trials (versus interferon β-1a) and supporting single-arm studies in specific subpopulations. In patients with PPMS, ocrelizumab reduced measures of clinical and MRI progression relative to placebo. Clinical benefits were maintained over ≥ 7.5 study years of treatment. Ocrelizumab was generally well tolerated and no new safety signals have emerged with long-term use. Extensive (albeit short-term) real-world data pertaining to ocrelizumab is consistent with that from clinical trials. Ocrelizumab provides the convenience of short, half-yearly infusions. Ocrelizumab continues to represent a generally well-tolerated, high-efficacy disease-modifying therapy (DMT) for RMS and is a valuable treatment for delaying disease progression in patients with PPMS (for whom there are currently no other approved DMTs).

Identification of a five-miRNA signature as a novel potential prognostic biomarker in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Background

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are involved in the prognosis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). This study used clinical data and expression data of miRNAs to develop a prognostic survival signature for NPC patients to detect high-risk subject.

Results

We identified 160 differentially expressed miRNAs using RNA-Seq data from the GEO database. Cox regression model consisting of hsa-miR-26a, hsa-let-7e, hsa-miR-647, hsa-miR-30e, and hsa-miR-93 was constructed by the least absolute contraction and selection operator (LASSO) in the training set. All the patients were classified into high-risk or low-risk groups by the optimal cutoff value of the 5-miRNA signature risk score, and the two risk groups demonstrated significant different survival. The 5-miRNA signature showed high predictive and prognostic accuracies. The results were further confirmed in validation and external validation set. Results from multivariate Cox regression analysis validated 5-miRNA signature as an independent prognostic factor. A total of 13 target genes were predicted to be the target genes of miRNA target genes. Both PPI analysis and KEGG analysis networks were closely related to tumor signaling pathways. The prognostic model of mRNAs constructed using data from the dataset GSE102349 had higher AUCs of the target genes and higher immune infiltration scores of the low-risk groups. The mRNA prognostic model also performed well on the independent immunotherapy dataset Imvigor210.

Conclusions

This study constructed a novel 5-miRNA signature for prognostic prediction of the survival of NPC patients and may be useful for individualized treatment of NPC patients.

The comparative efficacy and safety of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: A network meta-analysis

With the recent successful targeting of B lymphocytes in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), treatment with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) may represent a promising managemental approach, particularly for those with relapsing/remitting MS (RRMS). A network meta-analysis was conducted based on a comprehensive search in Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of currently available anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), including rituximab, ocrelizumab, and ofatumumab, versus a common comparator (interferon beta-1a [INFβ-1a]) in RRMS patients recruited in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). In a frequentist network meta-analytical model, annualized relapse rates (ARRs) and safety outcomes were expressed as risk ratios (RRs), whereas relapse-free events were expressed as odds ratios (ORs). Treatment ranking was performed using P-scores. The certainty of evidence was appraised using the GRADE approach. Five publications reported the outcomes of seven RCTs (3938 patients, 67.09% females). Compared to INFβ-1a, ocrelizumab reduced the risk of ARR (RR = 0.56, 95% CI, 0.50-0.64), serious adverse events (RR = 0.17, 95% CI, 0.09-0.30), and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (SAEs, RR = 0.60, 95% CI, 0.39-0.93), and it was associated with higher odds of no relapses (OR = 2.47, 95% CI, 2.00-3.05). Ocrelizumab ranked best among all other treatments in terms of reducing ARR and SAEs. The quality of evidence was low for ocrelizumab, low to moderate for rituximab, and high for ofatumumab. Further large-sized, well-designed RCTs are needed to corroborate the efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab and other anti-CD20 mAbs in RRMS.

Impact of disease-modifying therapies on MRI and neurocognitive outcomes in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are the mainstay of treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). There is established evidence that DMTs are effective at reducing relapse rate and disease progression in RRMS, but there has been less consideration to the synthesis of MRI and neurocognitive outcomes, which play an increasingly important role in treatment decisions. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis is to examine the relative efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of DMTs for RRMS, using MRI and neurocognitive outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search electronic databases, including MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, with no date restrictions. We will also search the websites of international regulatory bodies for pharmaceuticals and international trial registries. We will include parallel group randomised controlled trials of DMTs including interferon beta-1a intramuscular, interferon beta-1a subcutaneous, interferon beta-1b, peginterferon beta-1a, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, ocrelizumab, alemtuzumab, dimethyl fumarate, teriflunomide, fingolimod, cladribine, ozanimod, mitoxantrone and rituximab, either head-to-head or against placebo in adults with RRMS. Primary outcomes include efficacy (MRI outcomes including new T1/hypointense lesions and T2/hyperintense lesions) and acceptability (all-cause dropouts). Secondary outcomes include gadolinium-enhancing lesions, cerebral atrophy and tolerability (dropouts due to adverse events). Neurocognitive measures across three domains including processing speed, working memory and verbal learning will be included as exploratory outcomes. Data will be analysed using a random-effects pairwise meta-analysis and a Bayesian hierarchical random effects network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of the included DMTs. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. The review will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews incorporating Network Meta-Analyses statement.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol does not require ethics approval. Results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed academic journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021239630.

Indirect comparisons of siponimod with fingolimod and ofatumumab in multiple sclerosis: assessing the feasibility of propensity score matching analyses

OBJECTIVE

Head-to-head trials comparing siponimod with fingolimod or ofatumumab in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) are lacking. Instead, the comparative efficacy of siponimod can be derived from indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs). We assessed the suitability of ITCs leveraging individual patient data from relevant phase III trials across different MS phenotypes.

METHODS

One siponimod trial in patients with secondary progressive MS (SPMS), four fingolimod trials (three in relapsing-remitting MS [RRMS], and one in primary progressive MS [PPMS]), and two ofatumumab trials in relapsing MS (RMS) were considered. The suitability of ITCs was evaluated based on trial design, patient eligibility criteria, baseline patient characteristics, placebo response, and outcome definitions for each trial. Analyses deemed feasible were conducted using one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

An ITC between siponimod in SPMS and either fingolimod in RRMS or ofatumumab in RMS was not feasible because of insufficient overlap in key patient characteristics (e.g. disability level and relapse history) and differences in placebo response. However, a comparison between siponimod in SPMS and fingolimod in PPMS was feasible because of sufficient overlap in eligibility criteria and baseline characteristics. One-to-one PSM demonstrated siponimod was favored relative to fingolimod for time to 6- and 3-month confirmed disability progression though not significantly different (hazard ratio 0.76 [95% confidence interval 0.48-1.20; p-value = .240] and hazard ratio 0.80 [95% confidence interval 0.52-1.22; p-value = .300], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

For trials in MS, clinical phenotype is an important determinant of ITC feasibility. An ITC between siponimod in SPMS and either fingolimod in RRMS or ofatumumab in RMS was not feasible. The only feasible comparison was between siponimod in SPMS and fingolimod in PPMS.

A Milestone in Multiple Sclerosis Therapy: Monoclonal Antibodies Against CD20-Yet Progress Continues

Multiple sclerosis (MS), which is a chronic inflammatory disease of the central nervous system, still represents one of the most common causes of persisting disability with an early disease onset. Growing evidence suggests B cells to play a crucial role in its pathogenesis and progression. Over the last decades, monoclonal antibodies (mabs) against the surface protein CD20 have been intensively studied as a B cell targeting therapy in relapsing MS (RMS) as well as primary progressive MS (PPMS). Pivotal studies on anti-CD20 therapy in RMS showed remarkable clinical and radiological effects, especially on acute inflammation and relapse biology. These results paved the way for further research on the implication of B cells in the pathogenesis of MS. Besides controlling relapse development in RMS, ocrelizumab (OCR) also showed clinical benefits in patients with PPMS and became the first approved drug for this disease course. In this review, we provide an overview of the current anti-CD20 mabs used or tested for the treatment of MS-namely rituximab (RTX), OCR, ofatumumab (OFA), and ublituximab (UB). Besides their effectiveness, we also discuss possible limitations and safety concerns especially in regard to long-term treatment, both for this class of drugs overall as well as for each anti-CD20 mab individually. Additionally, we elucidate to what extent anti-CD20 therapy may alter the function of other immune cells, both directly or indirectly. Finally, we cover the current knowledge on repopulation of CD20+ cells after cessation of anti-CD20 treatment and discuss future aspirations towards alternative, further developed B cell silencing therapies.

Identification of 5-methylcytosine-related signature for predicting prognosis in ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is one of the most common malignancies often resulting in a poor prognosis. 5-methylcytosine (m5C) is a common epigenetic modification with roles in eukaryotes. However, the expression and function of m5C regulatory factors in ovarian cancer remained unclear.

RESULTS

Two molecular subtypes with different prognostic and clinicopathological features were identified based on m5C regulatory factors. Meanwhile, functional annotation showed that in the two subtypes, 452 differentially expressed genes were significantly related to the malignant progression of ovarian cancer. Subsequently, four m5C genes were screened to construct a risk marker predictive of overall survival and indicative of clinicopathological features of ovarian cancer, also the robustness of the risk marker was verified in external dataset and internal validation set. multifactorial cox regression analysis and nomogram demonstrated that risk score was an independent prognostic factor for ovarian cancer prognosis.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our results revealed that m5C-related genes play a critical role in tumor progression in ovarian cancer. Further detection of m5C methylation could provide a novel targeted therapy for treating ovarian cancer.

A two-stage prediction model for heterogeneous effects of treatments

Treatment effects vary across different patients, and estimation of this variability is essential for clinical decision‐making. We aimed to develop a model estimating the benefit of alternative treatment options for individual patients, extending a risk modeling approach in a network meta‐analysis framework. We propose a two‐stage prediction model for heterogeneous treatment effects by combining prognosis research and network meta‐analysis methods where individual patient data are available. In the first stage, a prognostic model to predict the baseline risk of the outcome. In the second stage, we use the baseline risk score from the first stage as a single prognostic factor and effect modifier in a network meta‐regression model. We apply the approach to a network meta‐analysis of three randomized clinical trials comparing the relapses in Natalizumab, Glatiramer Acetate, and Dimethyl Fumarate, including 3590 patients diagnosed with relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis. We find that the baseline risk score modifies the relative and absolute treatment effects. Several patient characteristics, such as age and disability status, impact the baseline risk of relapse, which in turn moderates the benefit expected for each of the treatments. For high‐risk patients, the treatment that minimizes the risk of relapse in 2 years is Natalizumab, whereas Dimethyl Fumarate might be a better option for low‐risk patients. Our approach can be easily extended to all outcomes of interest and has the potential to inform a personalized treatment approach.

Cornuside alleviates experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis by inhibiting Th17 cell infiltration into the central nervous system

The present study was conducted to clarify the therapeutic effect of cornuside on experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) and its influence on T helper 17 (Th17) cell and regulatory T (Treg) cell infiltration into the central nervous system. Rats were randomly placed into four treatment groups: control, EAE, EAE+cornuside, and EAE+prednisolone. The neurological function scores of rats were assessed daily. On the second day after EAE rats began to show neurological deficit symptoms, the four groups were treated with normal saline, normal saline, cornuside (150 mg/kg), and prednisolone (5 mg/kg), respectively. The treatment was discontinued after two weeks, and the spinal cord was obtained for hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and luxol fast blue staining, as well as retinoic acid receptor-related orphan receptor γ (RORγ) and forkhead box protein P3 (Foxp3) immunohistochemical staining. Blood was collected for Th17 and Treg cell flow cytometry testing, and the serum levels of interleukin (IL)-17A, IL-10, transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β), IL-6, IL-23, and IL-2 were measured via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Compared with rats in the EAE group, rats in the EAE+cornuside and EAE+prednisolone groups began to recover from neurological deficits earlier, and had a greater degree of improvement of symptoms. Focal inflammation, demyelination, and RORγ-positive cell infiltration were reduced by cornuside or prednisolone treatment, whereas the Foxp3-positive cell numbers were not significantly different. Meanwhile, the number of Th17 cells and the IL-17A, IL-6, and IL-23 levels were lower in the blood after cornuside or prednisolone treatment, whereas the number of Treg cells or the levels of IL-10, TGF-β, and IL-2 were not markedly different. Cornuside can alleviate symptoms of EAE neurological deficits through its anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive effects, and Th17 cells may be one of its therapeutic targets.

Disease modifying therapies in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and compliance of up-to-date disease modifying therapies (DMTs) in patients with remitting-relapsing MS (RRMS).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for eligible studies. Annualized relapse rate, discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) were assessed as primary outcomes. Sensitivity analysis and inconsistency detection were performed to evaluated whether exclusion of high-risk studies affected the validity. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's Risk-of-Bias Tool 2. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to estimate the rankings among different DMTs.

RESULTS

21 studies were included for main report. Seven studies were evaluated as "high risk" and were therefore excluded. Exclusion of high-risk studies did not affect the validity of evidence. The risk of relapses for most DMTs except Betaseron 50 μg was significantly lower comparing to placebo. Incompliance in patients treated with DMTs was not significantly increased comparing to placebo. Dimethyl fumarate and ocrelizumab had superiority in improving MRI outcomes. Ocrelizumab and ofatumumab had the largest reduction of risk in disability progression at 3 months. Referring to SUCRA, ofatumumab, alemtuzumab and natalizumab showed the best efficacy and compliance.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrated the hierarchy of DMTs treating RRMS. Ofatumumab, alemtuzumab and natalizumab have superiority with respect to effectiveness and compliance. More studies are required to explore the long-term effect of DMTs. Our findings could provide helpful information and contribute to clinical treatment decision-making.

Efficacy classification of modern therapies in multiple sclerosis

Background: The Association of British Neurologists (ABN) 2015 guidelines suggested classifying multiple sclerosis therapies according to their average relapse reduction. We sought to classify newer therapies (cladribine, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, ozanimod) based on these guidelines. Materials & methods: Therapies were classified by using direct comparative trial results as per ABN guidelines and generating classification probabilities for each therapy based on comparisons versus placebo in a network meta-analysis for annualized relapse rate. Results: For both approaches, cladribine and ofatumumab were classified as high efficacy. Ocrelizumab and ozanimod (1.0 mg) were classified as moderate or high efficacy depending on the approach used. Conclusion: Cladribine and ofatumumab have an efficacy comparable with therapies classified in the ABN guidelines as high efficacy.

Disease modifying therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: Use and costs in Australia (1996-2019)

BACKGROUND

New disease modifying therapies (DMT) to control relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) have been introduced to the market in the past few years and are now widely used in Australia.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the dispensed use of government subsidised RRMS DMTs in Australia from 1996 to 2019.

METHODS

We obtained data of dispensed use of DMTs from the Australian Government's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) administered by Medicare Australia. We measured use as defined daily dose (DDD) per 100,000 population per day. We obtained jurisdictional population data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

RESULTS

Total DMT use increased by an average of 18% annually, from 2.4 (in 1996) to 69.9 DDD/100,000/day in 2019. Interferon β1B was the most commonly used medicine between 1996 and 2000, Interferon β1A between 2001 and 2014, and fingolimod subsequently. Among Australian states, Tasmania (the southernmost state) had the highest dispensed DMT use of 94.6 DDD/100,000/day in 2019. Concession beneficiaries under the Government's PBS had both lower use and cost per patient than general beneficiaries did. Fingolimod and ocrelizumab accounted for 55% of total expenditure on MS drug therapy in 2019.

CONCLUSION

The use of oral DMTs might increasingly replace parenteral treatments in the near future. Given the current substantial government expenditure on oral DMTs, it will be imperative to examine the real world effectiveness of DMTs.

Joining the Dots: Linking Disconnected Networks of Evidence Using Dose-Response Model-Based Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Network meta-analysis (NMA) synthesizes direct and indirect evidence on multiple treatments to estimate their relative effectiveness. However, comparisons between disconnected treatments are not possible without making strong assumptions. When studies including multiple doses of the same drug are available, model-based NMA (MBNMA) presents a novel solution to this problem by modeling a parametric dose-response relationship within an NMA framework. In this article, we illustrate several scenarios in which dose-response MBNMA can connect and strengthen evidence networks.

METHODS

We created illustrative data sets by removing studies or treatments from an NMA of triptans for migraine relief. We fitted MBNMA models with different dose-response relationships. For connected networks, we compared MBNMA estimates with NMA estimates. For disconnected networks, we compared MBNMA estimates with NMA estimates from an "augmented" network connected by adding studies or treatments back into the data set.

RESULTS

In connected networks, relative effect estimates from MBNMA were more precise than those from NMA models (ratio of posterior SDs NMA v. MBNMA: median = 1.13; range = 1.04-1.68). In disconnected networks, MBNMA provided estimates for all treatments where NMA could not and were consistent with NMA estimates from augmented networks for 15 of 18 data sets. In the remaining 3 of 18 data sets, a more complex dose-response relationship was required than could be fitted with the available evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Where information on multiple doses is available, MBNMA can connect disconnected networks and increase precision while making less strong assumptions than alternative approaches. MBNMA relies on correct specification of the dose-response relationship, which requires sufficient data at different doses to allow reliable estimation. We recommend that systematic reviews for NMA search for and include evidence (including phase II trials) on multiple doses of agents where available.

The implications of suboptimal year-1 outcomes with disease-modifying therapy in employees with multiple sclerosis

AIM

Multiple sclerosis (MS) poses a substantial employer burden in medically related absenteeism and disability costs due to the chronic and debilitating nature of the disease. Although previous studies have evaluated relapse, nonadherence, discontinuation, and switching individually, little is known about their overall collective prevalence and implications in employees with MS treated with disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). This study evaluated the proportion of employees with MS with suboptimal DMT year-1 outcomes and to quantify the clinical and economic burden of suboptimal year-1 outcomes from a US employer perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Employees with MS were selected from the Workpartners database. Eligibility criteria were: ≥2 MS diagnosis claims (ICD-9-CM 340.xx/ICD-10-CM G35) from January 1, 2010-March 31, 2019, ≥1 once-/twice-daily oral or self-injectable DMT claim (first claim = index), continuous eligibility 6-months pre-/1-year post-index, no baseline DMT, and age 18-64 years. Suboptimal year-1 outcomes included: non-adherence (proportion of days covered <80%), discontinuation (gap >60 days), switch, or relapse (MS-related hospitalization, emergency room visit, or outpatient visit with corticosteroid). A two-part logistic-generalized linear model evaluated costs.

RESULTS

Of 488 eligible patients, half (n = 247; 50.6%) had suboptimal year-1 outcomes (39.5% non-adherence, 9.8% discontinuation, 10.9% switching, 20.7% relapse; not mutually exclusive). Employees with suboptimal year-1 outcomes had higher all-cause medical ($12,730 vs. $6,428; p < 0.0001), MS-related medical ($5,444 vs. $2,652; p < 0.0001), non-DMT pharmacy ($2,920 vs. $2,169; p = 0.0199), sick leave ($1247 vs. $908; p = 0.0274), and short-term disability ($934 vs. $146; p = 0.0001) costs. Long-term disability ($751 vs. $0; p = 0.1250) and Workers' Compensation ($56 vs. $24; p = 0.1276) did not significantly differ.

LIMITATIONS

Administrative claims lack clinical information. Results may not be generalizable to other patients or care settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Half of the employees with MS in this sample had suboptimal year-1 outcomes (i.e. non-adherence, discontinuation, switching, or relapse). These suboptimal year-1 outcomes were associated with greater medical, sick leave, and short-term disability costs.

Comparison of ofatumumab and other disease-modifying therapies for relapsing multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis

Aim: To compare the efficacy of ofatumumab to other disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). Materials & methods: A network meta-analysis was conducted to determine the relative effect of ofatumumab on annualized relapse rate and confirmed disability progression at 3 months and 6 months. Results: For each outcome, ofatumumab was as effective as other highly efficacious monoclonal antibody DMTs (i.e., alemtuzumab, natalizumab and ocrelizumab). Conclusion: Ofatumumab offers beneficial outcomes for RMS by reducing relapse and disability progression risk.

Spie charts for quantifying treatment effectiveness and safety in multiple outcome network meta-analysis: a proof-of-concept study

BACKGROUND

Network meta-analysis (NMA) simultaneously synthesises direct and indirect evidence on the relative efficacy and safety of at least three treatments. A decision maker may use the coherent results of an NMA to determine which treatment is best for a given outcome. However, this evidence must be balanced across multiple outcomes. This study aims to provide a framework that permits the objective integration of the comparative effectiveness and safety of treatments across multiple outcomes.

METHODS

In the proposed framework, measures of each treatment's performance are plotted on its own pie chart, superimposed on another pie chart representing the performance of a hypothetical treatment that is the best across all outcomes. This creates a spie chart for each treatment, where the coverage area represents the probability a treatment ranks best overall. The angles of each sector may be adjusted to reflect the importance of each outcome to a decision maker. The framework is illustrated using two published NMA datasets comparing dietary oils and fats and psoriasis treatments. Outcome measures are plotted in terms of the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. The use of the spie chart was contrasted with that of the radar plot.

RESULTS

In the NMA comparing the effects of dietary oils and fats on four lipid biomarkers, the ease of incorporating the lipids' relative importance on spie charts was demonstrated using coefficients from a published risk prediction model on coronary heart disease. Radar plots produced two sets of areas based on the ordering of the lipids on the axes, while the spie chart only produced one set. In the NMA comparing psoriasis treatments, the areas inside spie charts containing both efficacy and safety outcomes masked critical information on the treatments' comparative safety. Plotting the areas inside spie charts of the efficacy outcomes against measures of the safety outcome facilitated simultaneous comparisons of the treatments' benefits and harms.

CONCLUSIONS

The spie chart is more optimal than a radar plot for integrating the comparative effectiveness or safety of a treatment across multiple outcomes. Formal validation in the decision-making context, along with statistical comparisons with other recent approaches are required.

A Systematic Review and Mixed Treatment Comparison of Pharmaceutical Interventions for Multiple Sclerosis

Background

Since 2010, 27 mixed-treatment comparisons (MTCs) of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis have been published. However, there has been continued evolution in the field of MTCs. Additionally, limitations in methodological approach and reporting transparency, even in the most recent publications, makes interpretation and comparison of existing studies difficult.

Objectives

The objectives of this study are twofold: (1) to estimate the efficacy and safety of DMTs at European Commission-approved doses compared with placebo in adults with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) using MTC, and (2) to identify and address methodological challenges when performing MTC in RRMS, thereby creating a baseline for comparisons with future treatments.

Methods

Searches were completed in 14 databases, including MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CDSR and DARE, from inception to June 2018 to identify published or unpublished prospective, randomised controlled trials of all European Union-approved DMTs or DMTs expected to be approved in the near future in RRMS or rapidly-evolving severe RRMS. No language or date restrictions were applied. Studies were included in the MTC if they were judged to have sufficiently similar characteristics, based on the following: patient age; proportion of male participants; Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score; duration of disease; number of relapses prior to enrolment and proportion of previously treated patients. Background information from the included studies, as well as effect size and confidence intervals (where relevant) of defined outcomes were extracted. Reporting of the MTC was consistent with the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) network meta-analysis guidelines.

Results

In total, 33 studies were included in the MTC. Annualised relapse rate (ARR 28 trials) was significantly reduced in all treatments compared with placebo. Alemtuzumab had the highest probability (63%) of being the most effective treatment in terms of ARR compared with placebo (rate ratio [RR] 0.28, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.21–0.38), followed by natalizumab (30% probability; RR 0.32, 95% CrI 0.23–0.43). The risk of 3- and 6-month confirmed disability progression (CDP3M, 13 trials; CDP6M, 14 trials) were similar; CDP6M was significantly reduced for alemtuzumab (hazard ratio [HR] 0.365; 95% CrI 0.165–0.725), ocrelizumab (HR 0.405, 95% CrI 0.188–0.853) and natalizumab (HR 0.459, 95% CrI 0.252–0.840) relative to placebo. There were no significant differences in the odds of serious adverse events (SAEs, 6 trials) between any treatment and placebo. The results of the MTC were limited by the lack of studies reporting direct comparisons between the included treatments and by heterogeneous reporting of key outcome data.

Conclusions

Meta-analyses confirmed the benefit of all DMTs in terms of relapse rate compared with placebo with a comparable rate of SAEs for the DMTs that could be included in the network. The rigor and transparency of reporting in this study provide a benchmark for comparisons with future new agents.

Electronic Supplementary Material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40120-020-00212-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patient perspective on decisions to switch disease-modifying treatments in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

There are now large cohorts of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (pwRRMS) who have taken several Disease-Modifying Treatments (DMTs). Studies about switching DMTs mostly focus on clinical outcomes rather than patients' decision-making. Neurologists are now required to support decisions at various times during the relapsing disease course and they do so with concerns about DMTs risks. This qualitative study investigates how pwRRMS weigh up the pros and cons of DMTs, focusing on perceptions of effectiveness and risks when new treatments are considered.

OBJECTIVE

To increase understanding of people's experiences of decision-making when switching DMTs.

METHODS

30 semi-structured interviews were conducted with pwRRMS in England. 16 participants had switched DMT and their experiences were compared with those who had only taken one DMT. Interviews were analysed thematically to answer: what main factors influence people's decision-making to switch DMTs and why?

RESULTS

Of the 16 participants with experience of switching DMT, eight had taken two or more DMTs; eight had taken three or more. Two was the DMT median. This study demonstrated that despite the term "switching" implying that similar treatments are inter-changeable, for pwRRMS taking new treatments involves different emotions, routines, risks, prognosis and communication experiences. Two meta themes identified were: 1) A distinctive, rapid and emotional decision-making process where old emotions related to MS prognosis are revisited. 2) Switching has a different impact on communication for escalation or de-escalation processes.

CONCLUSION

Switching DMT involves different routines, risks, prognosis and communication experiences. These decisions are emotionally difficult because of the fear about transitioning to secondary progressive MS, and DMT effectiveness uncertainty. Patient centred decision aids should include information about first and consecutive treatment decisions.