1
|
Tramacere I, Virgili G, Perduca V, Lucenteforte E, Benedetti MD, Capobussi M, Castellini G, Frau S, Gonzalez-Lorenzo M, Featherstone R, Filippini G. Adverse effects of immunotherapies for multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 11:CD012186. [PMID: 38032059 PMCID: PMC10687854 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012186.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Irene Tramacere
- Department of Research and Clinical Development, Scientific Directorate, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milan, Italy
| | - Gianni Virgili
- Department of Neurosciences, Psychology, Drug Research and Child Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Ophthalmology, IRCCS - Fondazione Bietti, Rome, Italy
| | - Vittorio Perduca
- Université Paris Cité, CNRS, MAP5, F-75006 Paris, France
- Université Paris-Saclay, UVSQ, Inserm, Gustave Roussy, CESP, 94805, Villejuif, France
| | - Ersilia Lucenteforte
- Department of Statistics, Computer Science and Applications "G. Parenti", University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Maria Donata Benedetti
- UOC Neurologia B - Policlinico Borgo Roma, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Verona, Italy
| | - Matteo Capobussi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Greta Castellini
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
- Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, IRCCS Galeazzi Orthopaedic Institute, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Marien Gonzalez-Lorenzo
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
- Department of Oncology, Laboratory of Clinical Research Methodology, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Graziella Filippini
- Scientific Director's Office, Carlo Besta Foundation and Neurological Institute, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Grzegorski T, Losy J. What do we currently know about the clinically isolated syndrome suggestive of multiple sclerosis? An update. Rev Neurosci 2020; 31:335-349. [DOI: 10.1515/revneuro-2019-0084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2019] [Accepted: 09/22/2019] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
AbstractMultiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, demyelinating, not fully understood disease of the central nervous system. The first demyelinating clinical episode is called clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) suggestive of MS. Although the most common manifestations of CIS are long tracts dysfunction and unilateral optic neuritis, it can also include isolated brainstem syndromes, cerebellar involvement, and polysymptomatic clinical image. Recently, the frequency of CIS diagnosis has decreased due to the more sensitive and less specific 2017 McDonald criteria compared with the revisions from 2010. Not all patients with CIS develop MS. The risk of conversion can be estimated based on many predictive factors including epidemiological, ethnical, clinical, biochemical, radiological, immunogenetic, and other markers. The management of CIS is nowadays widely discussed among clinicians and neuroscientists. To date, interferons, glatiramer acetate, teriflunomide, cladribine, and some other agents have been evaluated in randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind studies relying on large groups of patients with the first demyelinating event. All of these drugs were shown to have beneficial effects in patients with CIS and might be used routinely in the future. The goal of this article is to explore the most relevant topics regarding CIS as well as to provide the most recent information in the field. The review presents CIS definition, classification, clinical image, predictive factors, and management. What is more, this is one of very few reviews summarizing the topic in the light of the 2017 McDonald criteria.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tomasz Grzegorski
- Department of Clinical Neuroimmunology, Chair of Neurology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 49 Przybyszewskiego Street, 60-355Poznan, Poland
| | - Jacek Losy
- Department of Clinical Neuroimmunology, Chair of Neurology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 49 Przybyszewskiego Street, 60-355Poznan, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Melendez-Torres GJ, Auguste P, Armoiry X, Maheswaran H, Court R, Madan J, Kan A, Lin S, Counsell C, Patterson J, Rodrigues J, Ciccarelli O, Fraser H, Clarke A. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of beta-interferon and glatiramer acetate for treating multiple sclerosis: systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2018; 21:1-352. [PMID: 28914229 DOI: 10.3310/hta21520] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND At the time of publication of the most recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance [technology appraisal (TA) 32] in 2002 on beta-interferon (IFN-β) and glatiramer acetate (GA) for multiple sclerosis, there was insufficient evidence of their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. OBJECTIVES To undertake (1) systematic reviews of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IFN-β and GA in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) and clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) compared with best supportive care (BSC) and each other, investigating annualised relapse rate (ARR) and time to disability progression confirmed at 3 months and 6 months and (2) cost-effectiveness assessments of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for CIS and RRMS compared with BSC and each other. REVIEW METHODS Searches were undertaken in January and February 2016 in databases including The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and the Science Citation Index. We limited some database searches to specific start dates based on previous, relevant systematic reviews. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts with recourse to a third when needed. The Cochrane tool and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and Philips checklists were used for appraisal. Narrative synthesis and, when possible, random-effects meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed. Cost-effectiveness analysis used published literature, findings from the Department of Health's risk-sharing scheme (RSS) and expert opinion. A de novo economic model was built for CIS. The base case used updated RSS data, a NHS and Personal Social Services perspective, a 50-year time horizon, 2014/15 prices and a discount rate of 3.5%. Outcomes are reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We undertook probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS In total, 6420 publications were identified, of which 63 relating to 35 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. In total, 86% had a high risk of bias. There was very little difference between drugs in reducing moderate or severe relapse rates in RRMS. All were beneficial compared with BSC, giving a pooled rate ratio of 0.65 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.76] for ARR and a hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.87) for time to disability progression confirmed at 3 months. NMA suggested that 20 mg of GA given subcutaneously had the highest probability of being the best at reducing ARR. Three separate cost-effectiveness searches identified > 2500 publications, with 26 included studies informing the narrative synthesis and model inputs. In the base case using a modified RSS the mean incremental cost was £31,900 for pooled DMTs compared with BSC and the mean incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were 0.943, giving an ICER of £33,800 per QALY gained for people with RRMS. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis the ICER was £34,000 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analysis, using the assessment group inputs gave an ICER of £12,800 per QALY gained for pooled DMTs compared with BSC. Pegylated IFN-β-1 (125 µg) was the most cost-effective option of the individual DMTs compared with BSC (ICER £7000 per QALY gained); GA (20 mg) was the most cost-effective treatment for CIS (ICER £16,500 per QALY gained). LIMITATIONS Although we built a de novo model for CIS that incorporated evidence from our systematic review of clinical effectiveness, our findings relied on a population diagnosed with CIS before implementation of the revised 2010 McDonald criteria. CONCLUSIONS DMTs were clinically effective for RRMS and CIS but cost-effective only for CIS. Both RCT evidence and RSS data are at high risk of bias. Research priorities include comparative studies with longer follow-up and systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016043278. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G J Melendez-Torres
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Peter Auguste
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Xavier Armoiry
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Hendramoorthy Maheswaran
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Rachel Court
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Jason Madan
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Alan Kan
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Stephanie Lin
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Carl Counsell
- Divison of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | | | - Jeremy Rodrigues
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Olga Ciccarelli
- Department of Neuroinflammation, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Hannah Fraser
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| | - Aileen Clarke
- Warwick Evidence, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Armoiry X, Kan A, Melendez-Torres GJ, Court R, Sutcliffe P, Auguste P, Madan J, Counsell C, Clarke A. Short- and long-term clinical outcomes of use of beta-interferon or glatiramer acetate for people with clinically isolated syndrome: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials and network meta-analysis. J Neurol 2018; 265:999-1009. [PMID: 29356977 PMCID: PMC5937891 DOI: 10.1007/s00415-018-8752-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2017] [Revised: 01/11/2018] [Accepted: 01/12/2018] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Background Beta-interferon (IFN-β) and glatiramer acetate (GA) have been evaluated in people with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) with the aim to delay a second clinical attack and a diagnosis of clinically definite multiple sclerosis (CDMS). We systematically reviewed trials evaluating the short- and long-term clinical effectiveness of these drugs in CIS. Methods We searched multiple electronic databases. We selected randomised controlled studies (RCTs) conducted in CIS patients and where the interventions were IFN-β and GA. Main outcomes were time to CDMS, and discontinuation due to adverse events (AE). We compared interventions using random-effect network meta-analyses (NMA). We also reported outcomes from long-term open-label extension (OLE) studies. Results We identified five primary studies. Four had open-label extensions following double-blind periods comparing outcomes between early vs delayed DMT. Short-term clinical results (double-blind period) showed that all drugs delayed CDMS compared to placebo. Indirect comparisons did not suggest superiority of any one active drug over another. We could not undertake a NMA for discontinuation due to AE. Long-term clinical results (OLE studies) showed that the risk of developing CDMS was consistently reduced across studies after early DMT treatment compared to delayed DMT (HR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.55, 0.74). No data supported the benefit of DMTs in reducing the time to, and magnitude of, disability progression. Conclusions Meta-analyses confirmed that IFN-β and GA delay time to CDMS compared to placebo. In the absence of evidence that early DMTs can reduce disability progression, future research is needed to better identify patients most likely to benefit from long-term DMTs. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00415-018-8752-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- X Armoiry
- Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, CV4 7AL, Coventry, England, UK.
| | - A Kan
- Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, CV4 7AL, Coventry, England, UK
| | - G J Melendez-Torres
- Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, CV4 7AL, Coventry, England, UK
| | - R Court
- Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, CV4 7AL, Coventry, England, UK
| | - P Sutcliffe
- Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, CV4 7AL, Coventry, England, UK
| | - P Auguste
- Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, CV4 7AL, Coventry, England, UK
| | - J Madan
- Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, CV4 7AL, Coventry, England, UK
| | - C Counsell
- Division of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK
| | - A Clarke
- Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, CV4 7AL, Coventry, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Filippini G, Del Giovane C, Clerico M, Beiki O, Mattoscio M, Piazza F, Fredrikson S, Tramacere I, Scalfari A, Salanti G. Treatment with disease-modifying drugs for people with a first clinical attack suggestive of multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 4:CD012200. [PMID: 28440858 PMCID: PMC6478290 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012200.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The treatment of multiple sclerosis has changed over the last 20 years. The advent of disease-modifying drugs in the mid-1990s heralded a period of rapid progress in the understanding and management of multiple sclerosis. With the support of magnetic resonance imaging early diagnosis is possible, enabling treatment initiation at the time of the first clinical attack. As most of the disease-modifying drugs are associated with adverse events, patients and clinicians need to weigh the benefit and safety of the various early treatment options before taking informed decisions. OBJECTIVES 1. to estimate the benefit and safety of disease-modifying drugs that have been evaluated in all studies (randomised or non-randomised) for the treatment of a first clinical attack suggestive of MS compared either with placebo or no treatment;2. to assess the relative efficacy and safety of disease-modifying drugs according to their benefit and safety;3. to estimate the benefit and safety of disease-modifying drugs that have been evaluated in all studies (randomised or non-randomised) for treatment started after a first attack ('early treatment') compared with treatment started after a second attack or at another later time point ('delayed treatment'). SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group Trials Register, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, clinicaltrials.gov, the WHO trials registry, and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports, and searched for unpublished studies (until December 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised and observational studies that evaluated one or more drugs as monotherapy in adult participants with a first clinical attack suggestive of MS. We considered evidence on alemtuzumab, azathioprine, cladribine, daclizumab, dimethyl fumarate, fingolimod, glatiramer acetate, immunoglobulins, interferon beta-1b, interferon beta-1a (Rebif®, Avonex®), laquinimod, mitoxantrone, natalizumab, ocrelizumab, pegylated interferon beta-1a, rituximab and teriflunomide. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two teams of three authors each independently selected studies and extracted data. The primary outcomes were disability-worsening, relapses, occurrence of at least one serious adverse event (AE) and withdrawing from the study or discontinuing the drug because of AEs. Time to conversion to clinically definite MS (CDMS) defined by Poser diagnostic criteria, and probability to discontinue the treatment or dropout for any reason were recorded as secondary outcomes. We synthesized study data using random-effects meta-analyses and performed indirect comparisons between drugs. We calculated odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) along with relative 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all outcomes. We estimated the absolute effects only for primary outcomes. We evaluated the credibility of the evidence using the GRADE system. MAIN RESULTS We included 10 randomised trials, eight open-label extension studies (OLEs) and four cohort studies published between 2010 and 2016. The overall risk of bias was high and the reporting of AEs was scarce. The quality of the evidence associated with the results ranges from low to very low. Early treatment versus placebo during the first 24 months' follow-upThere was a small, non-significant advantage of early treatment compared with placebo in disability-worsening (6.4% fewer (13.9 fewer to 3 more) participants with disability-worsening with interferon beta-1a (Rebif®) or teriflunomide) and in relapses (10% fewer (20.3 fewer to 2.8 more) participants with relapses with teriflunomide). Early treatment was associated with 1.6% fewer participants with at least one serious AE (3 fewer to 0.2 more). Participants on early treatment were on average 4.6% times (0.3 fewer to 15.4 more) more likely to withdraw from the study due to AEs. This result was mostly driven by studies on interferon beta 1-b, glatiramer acetate and cladribine that were associated with significantly more withdrawals for AEs. Early treatment decreased the hazard of conversion to CDMS (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.60). Comparing active interventions during the first 24 months' follow-upIndirect comparison of interferon beta-1a (Rebif®) with teriflunomide did not show any difference on reducing disability-worsening (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.66). We found no differences between the included drugs with respect to the hazard of conversion to CDMS. Interferon beta-1a (Rebif®) and teriflunomide were associated with fewer dropouts because of AEs compared with interferon beta-1b, cladribine and glatiramer acetate (ORs range between 0.03 and 0.29, with substantial uncertainty). Early versus delayed treatmentWe did not find evidence of differences between early and delayed treatments for disability-worsening at a maximum of five years' follow-up (3% fewer participants with early treatment (15 fewer to 11.1 more)). There was important variability across interventions; early treatment with interferon beta-1b considerably reduced the odds of participants with disability-worsening during three and five years' follow-up (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.84 and OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.89). The early treatment group had 19.6% fewer participants with relapses (26.7 fewer to 12.7 fewer) compared to late treatment at a maximum of five years' follow-up and early treatment decreased the hazard of conversion to CDMS at any follow-up up to 10 years (i.e. over five years' follow-up HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.73). We did not draw any conclusions on long-term serious AEs or discontinuation due to AEs because of inadequacies in the available data both in the included OLEs and cohort studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Very low-quality evidence suggests a small and uncertain benefit with early treatment compared with placebo in reducing disability-worsening and relapses. The advantage of early treatment compared with delayed on disability-worsening was heterogeneous depending on the actual drug used and based on very low-quality evidence. Low-quality evidence suggests that the chances of relapse are less with early treatment compared with delayed. Early treatment reduced the hazard of conversion to CDMS compared either with placebo, no treatment or delayed treatment, both in short- and long-term follow-up. Low-quality evidence suggests that early treatment is associated with fewer participants with at least one serious AE compared with placebo. Very low-quality evidence suggests that, compared with placebo, early treatment leads to more withdrawals or treatment discontinuation due to AEs. Difference between drugs on short-term benefit and safety was uncertain because few studies and only indirect comparisons were available. Long-term safety of early treatment is uncertain because of inadequately reported or unavailable data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Graziella Filippini
- Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Neurologico Carlo BestaScientific Directionvia Celoria, 11MilanItaly20133
| | - Cinzia Del Giovane
- University of Modena and Reggio EmiliaCochrane Italy, Department of Diagnostic, Clinical and Public Health MedicineVia del Pozzo 71ModenaItaly41124
| | - Marinella Clerico
- AOU San Luigi GonzagaUniversity of Turin, Division of NeurologyRegione Gonzole, 13OrbassanoItaly10043
| | | | - Miriam Mattoscio
- Imperial College LondonDepartment of Medicine, Division of Brain Sciences, Centre for Neuroscience, Wolfson Neuroscience LaboratoriesDu Cane RoadLondonUKW12 0NN
| | - Federico Piazza
- AOU San Luigi GonzagaUniversity of Turin, Division of NeurologyRegione Gonzole, 13OrbassanoItaly10043
| | - Sten Fredrikson
- Karolinska InstitutetDepartment of Clinical NeuroscienceStockholmSweden17177
| | - Irene Tramacere
- Fondazione IRCCS, Istituto Neurologico Carlo BestaScientific Directionvia Celoria, 11MilanItaly20133
| | - Antonio Scalfari
- Imperial College LondonDepartment of Medicine, Division of Brain Sciences, Centre for Neuroscience, Wolfson Neuroscience LaboratoriesDu Cane RoadLondonUKW12 0NN
| | - Georgia Salanti
- University of BernInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM)Finkenhubelweg 11BernSwitzerland3005
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Al Tahan AM, Alsharoqi I, Bohlega SA, Dahdaleh M, Daif A, Deleu D, Esmat K, Giampaolo D, Freedman MS, Gwilt M, Hosny H, Inshasi JS, Aljumah M, Khalifa A, Pakdaman H, Szólics M, Yamout BI, Sahraian MA, Zakaria MF. Characteristics of multiple sclerosis in the Middle East with special reference to the applicability of international guidelines to the region. Int J Neurosci 2013; 124:635-41. [DOI: 10.3109/00207454.2013.865620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
|
7
|
Future of management of multiple sclerosis in the middle East: a consensus view from specialists in ten countries. Mult Scler Int 2013; 2013:952321. [PMID: 24455267 PMCID: PMC3877627 DOI: 10.1155/2013/952321] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2013] [Revised: 10/28/2013] [Accepted: 10/29/2013] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
The prevalence of multiple sclerosis (MS) is now considered to be medium-to-high in the Middle East and is rising, particularly among women. While the characteristics of the disease and the response of patients to disease-modifying therapies are generally comparable between the Middle East and other areas, significant barriers to achieving optimal care for MS exist in these developing nations. A group of physicians involved in the management of MS in ten Middle Eastern countries met to consider the future of MS care in the region, using a structured process to reach a consensus. Six key priorities were identified: early diagnosis and management of MS, the provision of multidisciplinary MS centres, patient engagement and better communication with stakeholders, regulatory body education and reimbursement, a commitment to research, and more therapy options with better benefit-to-risk ratios. The experts distilled these priorities into a single vision statement: "Optimization of patient-centred multidisciplinary strategies to improve the quality of life of people with MS." These core principles will contribute to the development of a broader consensus on the future of care for MS in the Middle East.
Collapse
|
8
|
When to initiate disease-modifying drugs for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis in adults? Mult Scler Int 2011; 2011:724871. [PMID: 22096641 PMCID: PMC3195775 DOI: 10.1155/2011/724871] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2010] [Accepted: 02/27/2011] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
For patients with Relapsing Remitting Multiple Scierosis Beta Interfaerons and Glatiramer Acetate were the first to be licensed for treatment. This review deals with one major question: when to initiate therapy? Through exploring the unique characteristics of the disease and treatement we suggest an approach that should be helpful in the process of decision-making.
Collapse
|
9
|
Comi G. Shifting the paradigm toward earlier treatment of multiple sclerosis with interferon beta. Clin Ther 2009; 31:1142-57. [PMID: 19695384 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/20/2009] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Axonal damage occurs early in the course of multiple sclerosis (MS). Among untreated patients, 85% to 94% with a first clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) suggestive of MS and positive findings on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are at risk for developing MS. OBJECTIVES This article reviews the current literature concerning early diagnosis of MS, the rationale for early immunomodulatory treatment of patients with a CIS and MRI evidence of central nervous system lesions, and the efficacy of early treatment with interferon beta (IFN-beta). METHODS MEDLINE was searched from 1990 through the end of 2008 for papers published in English concerning the treatment of MS. Search terms included IFN-beta, early treatment, CIS, and multiple sclerosis, and limits were set to return results related to human clinical trials in adults. RESULTS Three pivotal randomized controlled trials were identified, 2 involving IFN-beta-1a (30 microg IM once weekly and 22 microg SC once weekly) and 1 involving IFN-beta-1b (250 microg SC qod). In these trials, treatment with IFN-beta effectively reduced the risk of developing MS by up to 50% in patients with a CIS. Furthermore, compared with delayed treatment, early treatment was associated with a reduced risk of disease progression: a 40% reduction in risk for confirmed disability progression at 3 years and a 41% reduction in risk of MS at 3 years. CONCLUSIONS The evidence that axonal damage begins in the early stages of MS, before symptoms are evident, provides a rationale for early intervention with immunomodulatory agents. In 3 pivotal clinical trials, IFN-beta effectively reduced the risk of developing clinically definite MS in CIS patients with a first demyelinating event and positive brain MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giancarlo Comi
- Department of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy. corni.giancarlowhsr.it
| |
Collapse
|