Oral pulsed therapy of relapsing multiple sclerosis with cladribine tablets - expert opinion on issues in clinical practice

Real-world use of cladribine tablets (completion rates and treatment persistence) in patients with multiple sclerosis in England: The CLARENCE study

BACKGROUND

Treatment with cladribine tablets, a high-efficacy disease-modifying therapy (DMT), has been available in England since 2017 for patients with highly active relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS). Real-world data on treatment completion, persistence and switching in patients treated with cladribine tablets are beginning to emerge, but only small single and multicentre cohorts have reported so far. This longitudinal retrospective observational study (CLARENCE) evaluated a large cohort (>1900) of patients with highly active relapsing MS, receiving cladribine tablets across England, to determine rates of treatment completion, persistence and switching in the real world.

METHODS

Using data obtained from Blueteq® forms, a compulsory requirement for DMT reimbursement in England, we evaluated rates of treatment completion (defined as the proportion of patients who received the full 2-year course of cladribine tablets), treatment persistence (defined as the proportion of patients who did not switch and/or discontinue treatment before receiving the full 2-year course) and treatment switch (defined as the proportion of patients who switched treatment from cladribine tablets to another DMT at any point after their first course). The change in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score between Years 1 and 2 of treatment was also determined. All data were analysed descriptively.

RESULTS

Blueteq® forms were completed for 1934 MS patients treated with cladribine tablets; of these patients, 691 (36%) were treatment naïve. The median EDSS score (range) at treatment initiation with cladribine tablets was 2.5 (0, 8.5). At time of analysis (September 2021, last follow-up point), a total of 1020 (53%) patients had completed the full 2-year course of cladribine tablets. At the same time point, 1762 (91%) patients were considered as treatment persistent (i.e., the patient had completed either 1 course of tablets with <18 months of follow-up data or the full 2-year course of cladribine tablets). Overall, 78 (4%) patients switched to another DMT at any point after their first course, which included 33 (1.7%) patients who switched after completing the full 2-year course. In terms of their disability, 469 (84%) patients had stable EDSS scores between Years 1 and 2 of treatment.

CONCLUSION

In this large real-world study of patients receiving cladribine tablets across England, high rates of treatment persistence and low rates of switching were observed, with only 1.7% of patients receiving the full 2-year course and switching treatment. The majority (84%) of evaluable patients showed stable disability between Years 1 and 2 of treatment. These findings complement earlier data from clinical trials and real-world studies, confirming the effectiveness of cladribine tablets for patients with highly active relapsing MS.

Treatment with Cladribine Tablets Beyond Year 4: A Position Statement by Southeast European Multiple Sclerosis Centers

Based on the results of the pivotal CLARITY study, cladribine tablets were approved for use in the European Union in 2017 as a high-efficacy therapy for highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS). Cladribine tablets are used as an induction therapy: half of the total dose is given in year 1 and the other half in year 2. In the CLARITY Extension trials, repeating the dose routinely in years 3 and 4, was not associated with significantly improved disease control. However, there is very limited evidence on how to manage people with MS (pwMS) beyond year 4, which is increasingly important because more and more patients are now ≥ 4 years after cladribine treatment. Overall, postapproval data show that treatment with two cladribine cycles effectively controls disease activity in the long term. However, there is general agreement that some pwMS with suboptimal response could benefit from retreatment. This study reviews the practical aspects of using cladribine tablets, summarizes the evidence from clinical trials and real-world studies on the safety and efficacy of cladribine, and proposes a treatment algorithm developed by expert consensus for pwMS previously treated with cladribine. In brief, we propose that additional courses of cladribine tablets should be considered in patients with minimal (no relapses, 1-2 new lesions) or moderate (1 relapse, 3-4 new lesions) disease activity, while significant disease activity (> 1 relapse, > 3 new lesions) or progression should warrant a switch to another high-efficacy treatment (HET). More evidence is needed to improve the treatment guidelines for pwMS who previously received cladribine.

Long-term management of multiple sclerosis patients treated with cladribine tablets beyond year 4

INTRODUCTION

Oral cladribine is a highly effective pulsed selective immune reconstitution therapy licensed for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) since 2017. A full treatment course comprises two treatment cycles given 1 year apart, followed by two treatment-free years. The management of cladribine-treated patients beyond year 4 needs to be addressed as patients have now passed the initial 4 years since European Medical Agency approval.

AREAS COVERED

A panel of neurologists and a neuroradiologist experienced in MS treatment/monitoring evaluated clinical trial data and real-world evidence and proposed recommendations for the management of cladribine-treated patients beyond year 4.

EXPERT OPINION

Continuous monitoring of disease activity during the treatment-free period is important. Subsequent management depends on the presence or absence of inflammatory disease activity, determined in the absence of consistent guidelines via practice-driven neurological decision criteria. Persisting or newly occurring inflammatory disease activity is an indication for further treatment, i.e. either re-initiation of cladribine or switching to another highly effective disease-modifying therapy. The decision to retreat or switch should be based on clinical and radiological evaluation considering disease course, treatment history, and safety aspects. In the absence of disease activity, either retreatment can be offered, or the treatment-free period can be extended under structured monitoring.