Efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with suboptimal response to prior disease-modifying therapies: A primary analysis from the phase 3b CASTING single-arm, open-label trial

Diroximel Fumarate in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: NEDA-3 After Re-Baselining in the Phase 3 EVOLVE-MS-1 Study

INTRODUCTION

Diroximel fumarate (DRF) and dimethyl fumarate (DMF) are orally administered fumarate disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS). The safety, tolerability, and exploratory efficacy of DRF were evaluated in the phase 3 EVOLVE-MS-1 study. No Evidence of Disease Activity (NEDA-3) is a composite efficacy endpoint used in clinical trials for MS defined as no relapse, no 24-week confirmed disability progression (CDP), no new/newly enlarging T2 lesions, and no new gadolinium-enhancing lesions. As NEDA outcomes in studies may be confounded by initial disease activity, the objective of this analysis was to evaluate NEDA-3 in EVOLVE-MS-1 for newly enrolled patients and patients who were re-baselined after approximately 7 weeks.

METHODS

Patients entered EVOLVE-MS-1 as either newly enrolled or having completed the 5-week phase 3 EVOLVE-MS-2 study of DRF and DMF. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was performed at baseline before each study (approx. 7 weeks apart) and at weeks 48 and 96 in EVOLVE-MS-1. Therefore, patients entering from EVOLVE-MS-2 were re-baselined after approximately 7 weeks. NEDA-3 outcomes on DRF are reported for prior DRF, prior DMF, and de novo patient groups.

RESULTS

Of 1057 patients in EVOLVE-MS-1, 239 (22.6%) had rolled over from receiving DRF in EVOLVE-MS-2 ("prior DRF"), 225 (21.3%) had rolled over from receiving DMF in EVOLVE-MS-2 ("prior DMF"), and 593 (56.1%) were newly enrolled ("de novo"). At week 48, Kaplan-Meier estimates of NEDA-3 were 72.3% (prior DRF), 72.1% (prior DMF), and 62.1% (de novo); at week 96, estimates were 50.2% (prior DRF), 48.2% (prior DMF), and 36.5% (de novo).

CONCLUSIONS

In EVOLVE-MS-1, after re-baselining at approximately 7 weeks, approximately half of DRF-treated patients achieved NEDA-3 at week 96, compared with 36.5% of patients who were not re-baselined. Re-baselining may be useful for assessing efficacy of DMTs by mitigating the influence of disease activity prior to the onset of efficacy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATIONS

NCT03093324 (EVOLVE-MS-2); NCT02634307 (EVOLVE-MS-1).

Race and ethnicity in multiple sclerosis phase 3 clinical trials: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Distinctive differences in multiple sclerosis (MS) have been observed by race and ethnicity. We aim to (1) assess how often race and ethnicity were reported in clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, (2) evaluate whether the population was diverse enough, and (3) compare with publications.

METHODS

We included phase 3 clinical trials registered with results on ClinicalTrials.gov between 2007 and 2023. When race and/or ethnicity were reported, we searched for the corresponding publications.

RESULTS

Out of the 99 included studies, 56% reported race and/or ethnicity, of which only 26% of those primarily completed before 2017. Studies reporting race or ethnicity contributed to a total of 33,891 participants, mainly enrolled in Eastern Europe. Most were White (93%), and the median percentage of White participants was 93% (interquartile range (IQR) = 86%-98%), compared to 3% for Black (IQR = 1%-12%) and 0.2% for Asian (IQR = 0%-1%). Four trials omitted race and ethnicity in publications and even when information was reported, some discrepancies in terminology were identified and categories with fewer participants were often collapsed.

CONCLUSION

More efforts should be done to improve transparency, accuracy, and representativeness, in publications and at a design phase, by addressing social determinants of health that historically limit the enrollment of underrepresented population.

Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in multiple sclerosis: Rethinking the current treatment strategy

Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies are highly-effective B-cell-depleting therapies in multiple sclerosis (MS). These treatments have expanded the arsenal of highly effective disease-modifying therapies, and have changed the landscape in understanding the pathophysiology of MS and the natural course of the disease. Nevertheless, these treatments come at the cost of immunosuppression and risk of serious infections, diminished vaccination response and treatment-related secondary hypogammaglobulinemia. However, the COVID pandemic has given way to a possibility of readapting these therapies, with most notably extended dosing intervals. While these new strategies show efficacy in maintaining inflammatory MS disease control, and although it is tempting to speculate that tailoring CD20 therapies will reduce the negative outcomes of long-term immunosuppression, it is unknown whether they provide meaningful benefit in reducing the risk of treatment-related secondary hypogammaglobulinemia and serious infections. This review highlights the available anti-CD20 therapies that are available for treating MS patients, and sheds light on encouraging data, which propose that tailoring anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies is the next step in rethinking the current treatment strategy.

Key characteristics of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies and clinical implications for multiple sclerosis treatment

The recent success of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapies in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) has highlighted the role of B cells in the pathogenesis of MS. In people with MS, the inflammatory characteristics of B-cell activity are elevated, leading to increased pro-inflammatory cytokine release, diminished anti-inflammatory cytokine production and an accumulation of pathogenic B cells in the cerebrospinal fluid. Rituximab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, ublituximab and BCD-132 are anti-CD20 therapies that are either undergoing clinical development, or have been approved, for the treatment of MS. Despite CD20 being a common target for these therapies, differences have been reported in their mechanistic, pharmacological and clinical characteristics, which may have substantial clinical implications. This narrative review explores key characteristics of these therapies. By using clinical trial data and real-world evidence, we discuss their mechanisms of action, routes of administration, efficacy (in relation to B-cell kinetics), safety, tolerability and convenience of use. Clinicians, alongside patients and their families, should consider the aspects discussed in this review as part of shared decision-making discussions to improve outcomes and health-related quality of life for people living with MS.

Peripheral memory B cells in multiple sclerosis vs. double negative B cells in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder: disease driving B cell subsets during CNS inflammation

B cells are fundamental players in the pathophysiology of autoimmune diseases of the central nervous system, such as multiple sclerosis (MS) and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). A deeper understanding of disease-specific B cell functions has led to the differentiation of both diseases and the development of different treatment strategies. While NMOSD is strongly associated with pathogenic anti-AQP4 IgG antibodies and proinflammatory cytokine pathways, no valid autoantibodies have been identified in MS yet, apart from certain antigen targets that require further evaluation. Although both diseases can be effectively treated with B cell depleting therapies, there are distinct differences in the peripheral B cell subsets that influence CNS inflammation. An increased peripheral blood double negative B cells (DN B cells) and plasmablast populations has been demonstrated in NMOSD, but not consistently in MS patients. Furthermore, DN B cells are also elevated in rheumatic diseases and other autoimmune entities such as myasthenia gravis and Guillain-Barré syndrome, providing indirect evidence for a possible involvement of DN B cells in other autoantibody-mediated diseases. In MS, the peripheral memory B cell pool is affected by many treatments, providing indirect evidence for the involvement of memory B cells in MS pathophysiology. Moreover, it must be considered that an important effector function of B cells in MS may be the presentation of antigens to peripheral immune cells, including T cells, since B cells have been shown to be able to recirculate in the periphery after encountering CNS antigens. In conclusion, there are clear differences in the composition of B cell populations in MS and NMOSD and treatment strategies differ, with the exception of broad B cell depletion. This review provides a detailed overview of the role of different B cell subsets in MS and NMOSD and their implications for treatment options. Specifically targeting DN B cells and plasmablasts in NMOSD as opposed to memory B cells in MS may result in more precise B cell therapies for both diseases.

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.

No Evidence of Disease Activity (NEDA) as a Clinical Assessment Tool for Multiple Sclerosis: Clinician and Patient Perspectives [Narrative Review]

The emergence of high-efficacy therapies for multiple sclerosis (MS), which target inflammation more effectively than traditional disease-modifying therapies, has led to a shift in MS management towards achieving the outcome assessment known as no evidence of disease activity (NEDA). The most common NEDA definition, termed NEDA-3, is a composite of three related measures of disease activity: no clinical relapses, no disability progression, and no radiological activity. NEDA has been frequently used as a composite endpoint in clinical trials, but there is growing interest in its use as an assessment tool to help patients and healthcare professionals navigate treatment decisions in the clinic. Raising awareness about NEDA may therefore help patients and clinicians make more informed decisions around MS management and improve overall MS care. This review aims to explore the potential utility of NEDA as a clinical decision-making tool and treatment target by summarizing the literature on its current use in the context of the expanding treatment landscape. We identify current challenges to the use of NEDA in clinical practice and detail the proposed amendments, such as the inclusion of alternative outcomes and biomarkers, to broaden the clinical information captured by NEDA. These themes are further illustrated with the real-life perspectives and experiences of our two patient authors with MS. This review is intended to be an educational resource to support discussions between clinicians and patients on this evolving approach to MS-specialized care.

Building a monitoring matrix for the management of multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) has a longitudinal and heterogeneous course, with an increasing number of therapy options and associated risk profiles, leading to a constant increase in the number of parameters to be monitored. Even though important clinical and subclinical data are being generated, treating neurologists may not always be able to use them adequately for MS management. In contrast to the monitoring of other diseases in different medical fields, no target-based approach for a standardized monitoring in MS has been established yet. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a standardized and structured monitoring as part of MS management that is adaptive, individualized, agile, and multimodal-integrative. We discuss the development of an MS monitoring matrix which can help facilitate data collection over time from different dimensions and perspectives to optimize the treatment of people with MS (pwMS). In doing so, we show how different measurement tools can combined to enhance MS treatment. We propose to apply the concept of patient pathways to disease and intervention monitoring, not losing track of their interrelation. We also discuss the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to improve the quality of processes, outcomes, and patient safety, as well as personalized and patient-centered care. Patient pathways allow us to track the patient's journey over time and can always change (e.g., when there is a switch in therapy). They therefore may assist us in the continuous improvement of monitoring in an iterative process. Improving the monitoring process means improving the care of pwMS.

The natural history of primary progressive multiple sclerosis: insights from the German NeuroTransData registry

BACKGROUND

Primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS) is characterised by gradual worsening of disability from symptom onset. Knowledge about the natural course of PPMS remains limited.

METHODS

PPMS patients from the German NeuroTransData (NTD) MS registry with data from 56 outpatient practices were employed for retrospective cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. The cross-sectional analysis included a contemporary PPMS cohort with a documented visit within the last 2 years before index date (1 Jan 2021). The longitudinal analysis included a disease modifying therapy (DMT)-naïve population and focused on the evolution of expanded disability status scale (EDSS) from the first available assessment at or after diagnosis within the NTD registry to index date. Outcome measures were estimated median time from first EDSS assessment to first 24-week confirmed EDSS ≥ 4 and ≥ 7. Besides EDSS change, the proportion of patients on disability pension were described over time.

RESULTS

The cross-sectional analysis included 481 PPMS patients (59.9% female, mean [standard deviation, SD] age 60.5 [11.5] years, mean [SD] EDSS 4.9 [2.1]). Estimated median time from first EDSS assessment after diagnosis to reach 24-week confirmed EDSS ≥ 4 for DMT-naïve patients was 6.9 years. Median time to EDSS ≥ 7 was 9.7 years for 25% of the population. Over a decade mean (SD) EDSS scores increased from 4.6 (2.1) to 5.7 (2.0); the proportion of patients on disability pension increased from 18.9% to 33.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides first insights into the German NTD real-world cohort of PPMS patients. Findings confirm the steadily deteriorating course of PPMS accompanied by increasingly limited quality of life.

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.

Effects of horizontal versus vertical switching of disease-modifying treatment after platform drugs on disease activity in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Austria

OBJECTIVES

To compare in a nationwide observational cohort the effectiveness, frequency and reasons for treatment interruption of dimethylfumarate (DMF) and teriflunomide (TERI) (horizontal switchers) versus alemtuzumab (AZM), cladribine (CLAD), fingolimod (FTY), natalizumab (NTZ), ocrelizumab (OCR) and ozanimod (OZA) (vertical switchers) in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (pwRRMS) and prior interferon beta (IFN-beta) or glatiramer-acetate (GLAT) treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The "horizontal switch cohort" included 669 and the "vertical switch cohort" 800 RRMS patients. We used propensity scores for inverse probability weighting in generalized linear (GLM) and Cox proportional hazards models to correct for bias in this non-randomized registry study.

RESULTS

Estimated mean annualized relapse rates (ARR) were 0.39 for horizontal and 0.17 for vertical switchers. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) in the GLM model showed an increased relapse probability of 86% for horizontal versus vertical switchers (IRR = 1.86; 95% CI 1.38-2.50; p < 0.001). Analyzing the time to the first relapse after treatment switch by Cox regression, a hazard ratio of 1.58 (95% CI 1.24-2.02; p < 0.001) indicated an increased risk of 58% for horizontal switchers. The hazard ratios for treatment interruption comparing horizontal versus vertical switchers were 1.78 (95% CI 1.46-2.18; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Horizontal switching after a platform therapy resulted in a higher relapse and interrupt probability and was associated with a trend towards less EDSS improvement comparing to vertical switching in Austrian RRMS patients.

Lessons from immunotherapies in multiple sclerosis

The improved understanding of multiple sclerosis (MS) neurobiology alongside the development of novel markers of disease will allow precision medicine to be applied to MS patients, bringing the promise of improved care. Combinations of clinical and paraclinical data are currently used for diagnosis and prognosis. The addition of advanced magnetic resonance imaging and biofluid markers has been strongly encouraged, since classifying patients according to the underlying biology will improve monitoring and treatment strategies. For example, silent progression seems to contribute significantly more than relapses to overall disability accumulation, but currently approved treatments for MS act mainly on neuroinflammation and offer only a partial protection against neurodegeneration. Further research, involving traditional and adaptive trial designs, should strive to halt, repair or protect against central nervous system damage. To personalize new treatments, their selectivity, tolerability, ease of administration, and safety must be considered, while to personalize treatment approaches, patient preferences, risk-aversion, and lifestyle must be factored in, and patient feedback used to indicate real-world treatment efficacy. The use of biosensors and machine-learning approaches to integrate biological, anatomical, and physiological parameters will take personalized medicine a step closer toward the patient's virtual twin, in which treatments can be tried before they are applied.

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).

Acute Effects of Ocrelizumab Infusion in Multiple Sclerosis Patients

B cell-depleting therapies such as ocrelizumab (OCR) are highly effective in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Especially at treatment start and initial infusion, infusion-related reactions (IRR) are a common adverse event. The relevance of acute changes of cell-depleting therapies on peripheral immune compartments and routine lab testing is important for clinical practice. We systematically analyzed routine blood parameters, detailed blood immunophenotyping and serum cytokine profiles in 45 MS patients starting on OCR. Blood samples were collected before and after corticosteroid premedication and directly after each OCR infusion of the first three ocrelizumab infusions. Blood B cells were rapidly depleted and accompanied only by a mild cytokine release at the first OCR infusion. Cytokine release was not significantly detectable from a third application in line with decreasing IRRs. B cell depletion was accompanied by short-lived changes in other immune cell populations in number, activation and cytokine secretion after each OCR infusion. Standard lab parameters did not show any clinically relevant changes. Our data demonstrate only mild changes during the first OCR infusion, which are not present any more during long-term treatment.

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).