Xu X, Chi S, Wang Q, Li C, Xu B, Zhang J, Chen X. Efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibody therapies for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: A network meta-analysis.
Mult Scler Relat Disord 2018;
25:322-328. [PMID:
30195200 DOI:
10.1016/j.msard.2018.08.026]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2018] [Revised: 07/18/2018] [Accepted: 08/22/2018] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Several monoclonal antibodies have been licensed for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). It is still unclear which treatment regimen should be recommended due to the lack of head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study aims to investigate the relative efficacy and safety of existing monoclonal antibody therapies in treating RRMS.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for RCTs of monoclonal antibodies for treatment of RRMS. We performed a network meta-analysis to identify evidence comparing monoclonal antibodies with one another, interferon beta-1a (INFβ-1a), or placebo in adult patients with RRMS. The primary efficacy outcome was annualized relapse rate and the primary safety outcome was incidence rate of serious adverse events.
RESULTS
A total of 14 eligible studies containing 9412 patients treated with 7 regimens were analyzed. INFβ-1a was the most common comparison treatment and showed an annualized relapse rate of 45.3%. All monoclonal antibody regimens, including natalizumab, natalizumab plus INFβ-1a, alemtuzumab, daclizumab, and ocrelizumab, were associated with significant reduction in annualized relapse rate and similar risks of serious adverse events. Cluster analysis showed that natalizumab plus INFβ-1a and alemtuzumab performed best in terms of high efficacy and safety. Natalizumab and daclizumab were characterized by high efficacy but relatively high risk of serious adverse events. Ocrelizumab was differentiated by high safety but relatively poor efficacy.
CONCLUSION
This network meta-analysis provided a comprehensive summary of efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibodies for RRMS, which might provide a reference for treatment. More direct comparison studies are warranted.
Collapse