Drug-Induced Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy (PML): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) was first described among patients affected by hematological or solid tumors. Following the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic, people living with HIV have represented most cases for more than a decade. With the diffusion of highly active antiretroviral therapy, this group progressively decreased in favor of patients undergoing treatment with targeted therapy/immunomodulators. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the objective was to assess which drugs are most frequently related to PML development, and report the incidence of drug-induced PML through a meta-analytic approach.

METHODS

The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Web of Science and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health Database (CADTH) were searched up to May 10, 2022. Articles that reported the risk of PML development after treatment with immunomodulatory drugs, including patients of both sexes under the age of 80 years, affected by any pathology except HIV, primary immunodeficiencies or malignancies, were included in the review. The incidence of drug-induced PML was calculated based on PML cases and total number of patients observed per 100 persons and the observation time. Random-effect metanalyses were conducted for each drug reporting pooled incidence with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and median (interquartile range [IQR]) of the observation time. Heterogeneity was measured by I2 statistics. Publication bias was examined through funnel plots and Egger's test.

RESULTS

A total of 103 studies were included in the systematic review. In our analysis, we found no includible study reporting cases of PML during the course of treatment with ocrelizumab, vedolizumab, abrilumab, ontamalimab, teriflunomide, daclizumab, inebilizumab, basiliximab, tacrolimus, belimumab, infliximab, firategrast, disulone, azathioprine or danazole. Dalfampridine, glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate and fingolimod show a relatively safe profile, although some cases of PML have been reported. The meta-analysis showed an incidence of PML cases among patients undergoing rituximab treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) of 0.01 cases/100 persons (95% CI - 0.08 to 0.09; I2 = 20.4%; p = 0.25) for a median observation period of 23.5 months (IQR 22.1-42.1). Treatment of MS with natalizumab carried a PML risk of 0.33 cases/100 persons (95% CI 0.29-0.37; I2 = 50%; p = 0.003) for a median observation period of 44.1 months (IQR 28.4-60) and a mean number of doses of 36.3 (standard deviation [SD] ± 20.7). When comparing data about patients treated with standard interval dosing (SID) and extended interval dosing (EID), the latter appears to carry a smaller risk of PML, that is, 0.08 cases/100 persons (95% CI 0.0-0.15) for EID versus 0.3 cases/100 persons (95% CI 0.25-0.34) for SID.

CONCLUSIONS

A higher risk of drug-related PML in patients whose immune system is not additionally depressed by means of neoplasms, HIV or concomitant medications is found in the neurological field. This risk is higher in MS treatment, and specifically during long-term natalizumab therapy. While this drug is still routinely prescribed in this field, considering the efficacy in reducing MS relapses, in other areas it could play a smaller role, and be gradually replaced by other safer and more recently approved agents.

Switching to natalizumab or fingolimod in multiple sclerosis: Comparative effectiveness and effect of pre-switch disease activity

BACKGROUND

Patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) who experience relapses on a first-line therapy (interferon, glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, or teriflunomide; collectively, "BRACETD") often switch to another therapy, including natalizumab or fingolimod. Here we compare the effectiveness of switching from a first-line therapy to natalizumab or fingolimod after ≥1 relapse.

METHODS

Data collected prospectively in the MSBase Registry, a global, longitudinal, observational registry, were extracted on February 6, 2018. Included patients were adults with RRMS with ≥1 relapse on BRACETD therapy in the year before switching to natalizumab or fingolimod. Included patients received natalizumab or fingolimod for ≥3 months after the switch.

RESULTS

Following 1:1 propensity score matching, 1000 natalizumab patients were matched to 1000 fingolimod patients. Mean (standard deviation) follow-up time was 3.02 (2.06) years after switching to natalizumab and 2.58 (1.64) years after switching to fingolimod. Natalizumab recipients had significantly lower annualized relapse rate (relative risk=0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.74), lower risk of first relapse (hazard ratio [HR]=0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.80), and higher confirmed disability improvement (HR=1.27; 95% CI, 1.03-1.57) than fingolimod recipients. No difference in confirmed disability worsening was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with RRMS switching from BRACETD demonstrated better outcomes with natalizumab than with fingolimod.

Long-Term Efficacy Outcomes of Natalizumab vs. Fingolimod in Patients With Highly Active Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: Real-World Data From a Multiple Sclerosis Reference Center

Background: Natalizumab (NTZ) and fingolimod (FTY) are second-line disease modifying treatments (DMTs) approved for Relapsing – Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS). Few studies are available on a direct comparison between NTZ and FTY, based on post-marketing experience, with conflicting results and reporting relatively short follow-up period.

Aim: We hereby report real-world experience of a MS Center with respect to NTZ vs. FTY comparison in terms of efficacy and safety, referencing long-term follow-up.

Methods: We used retrospective data for all patients that received 2nd-line treatment NTZ (since May 2007) or FTY (since September 2011). Primary endpoints were, among others, annual EDSS score (mean change from baseline), time to disability worsening or improvement, Annualized Relapse Rate (ARR) after 12 and 24 months and upon total treatment duration, time to first relapse and time to radiological progression.

Results: A total of 138 unmatched patients, 84 treated with NTZ and 54 treated with FTY were included. Following Propensity Score (PS) matching, 31 patients in each group were retained. Mean follow-up period for NTZ- and FTY-treated patients was 4.43 ± 0.29 and 3.59 ± 0.32 years (p = 0.057), respectively. In the matched analysis, time to disability improvement and time to disability worsening was comparable between groups. A higher proportion of patients remained free of relapse under NTZ, compared to FTY (Log Rank test p = 0.021, HR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.08–0.8), as well as free of MRI activity (Log Rank test p = 0.006, HR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.08–0.6). Treatment discontinuation due to MRI activity was significantly higher for FTY-treated patients compared to NTZ (Log Rank test p = 0.019, HR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.05–0.76).

Conclusion: Our results indicate toward NTZ superiority with respect to relapse and MRI activity outcomes. The fact that NTZ-treated patients may achieve long-standing clinical and radiological remission points toward the need for long follow-up data.

The effectiveness of natalizumab vs fingolimod-A comparison of international registry studies

BACKGROUND

Natalizumab and fingolimod were the first preparations recommended for disease breakthrough in priorly treated relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Of three published head-to-head studies two showed that natalizumab is the more effective to prevent relapses and EDSS worsening.

METHODS

By re-analyzing original published results from MSBase, France, and Denmark using uniform methodologies, we aimed at identifying the effects of differences in methodology, in the MS-populations, and at re-evaluating the differences in effectiveness between the two drugs. We gained access to copies of the individual amended databases and pooled all data. We used uniform inclusion/exclusion criteria and statistical methods with Inverse Probability Treatment Weighting.

RESULTS

The pooled analyses comprised 968 natalizumab- and 1479 fingolimod treated patients. The on-treatment natalizumab/fingolimod relapse rate ratio was 0.77 (p=0.004). The hazard ratio (HR) for a first relapse was 0.82 (p=0.030), and the HR for sustained EDSS improvement was 1.4 (p=0.009). There were modest differences between each of the original published studies and the replication study, but the conclusions of the three original studies remained unchanged: in two of them natalizumab was more effective, but in the third there was no difference between natalizumab and fingolimod.

CONCLUSION

The results were largely invariant to the epidemiological and statistical methods but differed between the MS populations. Generally, the advantage of natalizumab was confirmed.

Long-term comparative analysis of no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3) status between multiple sclerosis patients treated with natalizumab and fingolimod for up to 4 years

Background

Comparative effectiveness of natalizumab and fingolimod over a follow-up longer than 2 years has been not addressed yet.

Objectives

To compare the effect on no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients treated with natalizumab or fingolimod for at least 4 years.

Methods

We included RRMS patients switched from first-line agents to natalizumab or fingolimod. Patients were propensity score (PS)-matched on a 1-to-1 basis. Percentages of patients reaching NEDA-3 status at 2 and 4 years of follow-up were compared using the chi-square test. The risk of not achieving NEDA-3 at 4 years was explored in matched samples by Cox regression models.

Results

We evaluated 174 PS-matched patients. Patients receiving natalizumab reached a NEDA-3 status at 2 and 4 years more frequently than those exposed to fingolimod (63% vs 44%, p=0.037; 45.7% vs 25.8%, p=0.015, respectively). Patients receiving natalizumab were at a significant lower risk of not achieving the NEDA-3 status at 4 years compared to those exposed to fingolimod (hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.54 (0.36–0.80), p=0.002).

Conclusions

Although both medications were effective in patients non-responding to first-line agents, natalizumab seems to be superior to fingolimod in RRMS in obtaining NEDA-3 status at 4 years.

BEST-MS: A prospective head-to-head comparative study of natalizumab and fingolimod in active relapsing MS

BACKGROUND

There are few head-to-head studies to compare highly active treatments in multiple sclerosis (MS).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness between natalizumab (NTZ) and fingolimod (FTY) in active relapsing-remitting MS.

METHOD

Best Escalation STrategy in Multiple Sclerosis (BEST-MS) is a multicentric, prospective study with a 12-month follow-up including patients with active MS. Treatment choice was at the discretion of physician. Clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data were collected at baseline and at 12 months. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients reaching no evidence of disease activity (NEDA) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included annualized relapse rate and MRI activity.

RESULTS

A total of 223 patients were included (NTZ: 109 and FTY: 114). Treatment groups were well balanced at baseline. Proportion of NEDA patients was 47.8% in NTZ group versus 30.4% in FTY group (p = 0.015). This superiority was driven by annualized relapse rate and MRI activity. In the multivariate analysis, treatment group was the only factor associated with NEDA at 12 months with a lower probability in FTY group (odds ratio (OR) = 0.49, p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

BEST-MS is a prospective study that compared head-to-head the effectiveness of NTZ and FTY in active relapsing-remitting MS. Our results suggest a superiority of NTZ over FTY.

Natalizumab versus fingolimod for patients with active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: results from REVEAL, a prospective, randomised head-to-head study

OBJECTIVE

To directly compare the efficacy of natalizumab and fingolimod in patients with active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

METHODS

This phase 4, randomised, rater- and sponsor-blinded, prospective, parallel-group, clinic-based head-to-head study was conducted at 43 sites in nine countries. Patients were randomised (1:1) to intravenous natalizumab 300 mg every 4 weeks or oral fingolimod 0.5 mg once daily for ≤52 weeks. Enrolment-related early study termination precluded assessment of the primary endpoint (evolution of new on-treatment gadolinium-enhancing (Gd+) lesions to persistent black holes). Unplanned exploratory analyses of secondary endpoints evaluated the effects of treatment on the development of new T1 Gd+ lesions and new/newly enlarging T2 lesions, lesion volumes and relapse outcomes.

RESULTS

The intent-to-treat population comprised 108 patients (natalizumab, n=54; fingolimod, n=54); 63 completed ≥24 weeks of treatment. Due to the limited numbers of events and patients at risk, MRI and relapse outcomes were reported over up to 24 and 36 weeks, respectively. The mean number of new T1 Gd+ lesions was numerically lower with natalizumab than with fingolimod by 4 weeks; accumulation rates were 0.02 and 0.09 per week, respectively, over 24 weeks (p=0.004). The cumulative probability of developing ≥1 lesion at 24 weeks was 40.7% with natalizumab versus 58.0% with fingolimod (HR=0.60; 95% CI 0.31-1.16; p=0.126); the corresponding probabilities for ≥2 lesions were 11.5% vs 48.5% (HR=0.25; 95% CI 0.09-0.68; p=0.007). No significant between-group differences were observed for the other MRI outcomes at 24 weeks. The cumulative probability of relapse over follow-up was 1.9% with natalizumab versus 22.3% with fingolimod (HR=0.08; 95% CI 0.01-0.64; p=0.017). Adverse events were consistent with known safety profiles.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that natalizumab is more efficacious than fingolimod in reducing multiple sclerosis relapses and T1 Gd+ lesion accumulation in patients with active disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT02342704; EUCTR2013-004622-29-IT; Post-results.

Newly approved agents for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: how real-world evidence compares with randomized clinical trials?

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, many treatment options have become available for relapsing remitting MS. Randomized clinical trials and real-world studies are complementary sources of information, and together have the potential to offer a comprehensive understanding of the safety and efficacy profiles of each drug, a critical factor for a personalized management of the disease.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors provide an up-to-date review of both RCTs and real-world studies assessing the safety and efficacy profiles of recently developed disease-modifying drugs for relapsing remitting MS. These include fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab and ocrelizumab.

EXPERT OPINION

From the authors' review of the literature, the efficacy profiles resulted from RCTs were confirmed by observational studies with regard to the disease-modifying drugs considered. The magnitude of the effects on annualized relapse rates and MRI active lesions was generally even larger in the observational studies compared to RCTs. From the safety point of view, observational studies revealed new adverse events, mostly in the area of bacterial and opportunistic infections, not seen in the relative registration programme. This is a very important gain because it allows to elaborate appropriate strategies to prevent and handle the risks.

Effectiveness of Fingolimod versus Natalizumab as Second-Line Therapy for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in Spain: Second-Line GATE Study

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of head-to-head studies comparing the efficacy of fingolimod (FIN) and natalizumab (NTZ) as second-line therapy for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

METHODS

Multicenter, observational study, in which, information of 388 patients randomly selected and treated with FIN or NTZ in routine clinical practice was retrospectively collected with the main objective of comparing the annualized relapse rate (ARR) over the first year, after FIN or NTZ treatment initiation.

RESULTS

Mean ARR during the first year of treatment was 0.28 in FIN group and 0.12 in NTZ group (p = 0.0064); nevertheless, the difference between groups lost statistical significance when the propensity score analysis was performed. Time to disability -progression was similar in both treatment groups (12.3 ± 6.7 months in FIN, and 12.8 ± 0.1 months in NTZ; p = 0.4654). Treatment persistence after the first year of treatment was higher in patients treated with FIN (95%) than in those treated with NTZ (84%; p = 0.0014).

CONCLUSIONS

After 12 months of treatment, both FIN and NTZ reduced the ARR, but ARR percent reduction was significantly higher with NTZ. Treatment persistence was higher in patients receiving FIN.

Annualized hospitalization rate with natalizumab vs fingolimod in second-line treatment for RRMS in the public healthcare system in Brazil: A claim database approach

Purpose

In the Brazilian public healthcare system, natalizumab is recommended as fourth-line treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Although natalizumab has already demonstrated higher effectiveness compared with fingolimod in some studies, this real-world study was conducted to evaluate annualized hospitalization rates (AHR) in Brazil for both treatments when switching from platform therapies. As secondary goals, we analyzed RRMS treatment patterns and hospitalization profiles.

Material and methods

We extracted data from the DATASUS database of patients with MS (ICD-10 G35) who initiated treatment from January 2012 to December 2017. Two cohorts were screened for different purposes. Cohort 1 was used to analyze treatment patterns and hospitalization profiles and was defined as individuals who had at least one claim related to MS therapies and had received at least two lines of treatment. The second cohort, which was a subset of the first, was used to compare natalizumab’s and fingolimod’s AHR reduction from previous treatment lines and included patients switching from platform therapy to one of these two drugs. Cohort 2 adjustment was assessed through two different statistical methods: propensity score (PS) and inverse probability weighting (IPW).

Results

Of 29,410 patients screened, 2,876 were included in cohort 1. Three quarters of hospitalizations reported in this cohort were for treatment of MS relapse. Cohort 2 included 1,005 patients, and natalizumab was more commonly used (n = 540) than fingolimod (n = 465). Both PS and IPW analyses showed that patients treated with natalizumab had a statistical significantly reduction in AHR compared with first-line treatment (p<0.01 for both PS and IPW), while fingolimod did not result in significant reduction in AHR (p = 0.20 for PS and p = 0.17 for IPW).

Conclusion

This study provides real-world evidence of natalizumab’s and fingolimod’s effectiveness in terms of AHR, with an increased reduction in AHR with natalizumab. The findings of this study also provide information to support disease management and healthcare planning in the Brazilian public healthcare system.

Effects of Natalizumab and Fingolimod on Clinical, Cognitive, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Measures in Multiple Sclerosis

Studies comparing the effects of natalizumab and fingolimod in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) are limited. We aimed to compare natalizumab and fingolimod effects on clinical, neuropsychological, and MRI measures in RRMS patients after 2 years of treatment. RRMS patients starting natalizumab (n = 30) or fingolimod (n = 25) underwent neurologic, neuropsychological, and brain MRI assessments at baseline, month (M) 6, M12, and M24. Volumes of lesions, brain, gray matter (GM), white matter (WM), and deep GM were measured. Fifteen healthy controls (HC) were also scanned at baseline and M24. Treatment groups were matched for baseline variables. At M24 versus baseline, both drugs reduced the relapse rate (p value < 0.001), stabilized disability, and improved cognitive function (fingolimod: p value = 0.03; natalizumab: p value = 0.01), without between-group differences. The natalizumab group had a higher proportion of freedom from MRI activity (67% vs 36%, p value = 0.02) and no evidence of disease activity-3 (NEDA-3) (57% vs 28%, p value = 0.04). At M24 vs M6, brain (- 0.35%, p value = 0.002 [fingolimod]; - 0.42%, p value < 0.001 [natalizumab]), GM (- 0.62%, p value < 0.001 [fingolimod]; - 0.64%, p value < 0.001 [natalizumab]), and WM (- 0.98%, p value < 0.001 [fingolimod]; - 0.99%, p value < 0.001 [natalizumab]) atrophy progressed at higher rates than in HC, but similarly between treatment groups, whereas only the natalizumab group showed deep GM atrophy (- 0.79%, p value = 0.02) (p value vs fingolimod not significant). In both groups, atrophy progression was correlated with lesion accumulation (r from - 0.49 to - 0.36, p values from 0.013 to 0.05), whereas no correlation was found between clinical and MRI changes. Natalizumab and fingolimod reduce disease activity and improve cognition in RRMS. Natalizumab seems superior to limit lesion accumulation, whereas both drugs similarly modify atrophy progression.

The effectiveness of interferon beta versus glatiramer acetate and natalizumab versus fingolimod in a Polish real-world population

Objective

The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients treated in MS centres in Poland.

Methods

Demographic and clinical data of all Polish RRMS patients receiving DMTs were prospectively collected from 2014 to 2018 in electronic files using the Therapeutic Program Monitoring System (SMPT).

Results

The study included 10,764 RRMS patients treated with DMTs in first-line and 1,042 in second-line programmes. IFNβ more effectively lengthened the times to the first relapse, disability progression, and brain MRI activity than GA. After 2 and 4 years of follow-up, more patients on IFNβ showed no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3) in comparison to GA (66.3% and 44.3% vs 55.2% and 33.2%, respectively; p<0.001). NAT more effectively reduced brain MRI activity than FTY (p = 0.001). More patients under NAT had NEDA-3 after 2 and 4 years of follow-up compared to FTY (66.2% and 42.1% vs 52.1% and 29.5%, respectively; p = 0.03). In adjusted analysis, a higher baseline Expanded Disability Status Score (EDSS) was a predictor of relapse (p<0.001) and NEDA-3 failure (p = 0.003).

Conclusion

IFNβ compared to GA and NAT compared to FTY more effectively reduced disease activity in a Polish population of RRMS patients.

The real-world effectiveness of natalizumab and fingolimod in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. An Italian multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Both natalizumab and fingolimod are highly effective in the treatment of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). In the absence of head-to-head trials, some observational studies have compared their efficacy with conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy of natalizumab and fingolimod in a cohort of RRMS patients in an observational, retrospective study.

METHODS

We included all consecutive RRMS patients who started natalizumab or fingolimod in three MS centres with a follow-up to 24 months and analysed clinical and brain MRI data after propensity score (PS) matching.

RESULTS

After 1:1 PS-matching, we retained 102 patients in both groups, with similar baseline features. After 24 months, although both drugs resulted highly effective, patients treated with natalizumab had a lower relapse risk (HR 0.59 CI 95% 0.35-1.00, p = 0.048) and higher time to first relapse. MRI-combined-unique-activity was found in 31.8% of natalizumab vs 43.2% of fingolimod treated patients (p = 0.28). We found a higher proportion of patients with confirmed regression of disability (19.2 vs 6.7%, p = 0.03) and 2-year no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3, 39.0% vs 22.0%, p = 0.04) in the natalizumab group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both drugs were highly effective in our cohort. Natalizumab proved superior in inducing regression of disability and 2-year-NEDA-3.

Long-term evaluation of NEDA-3 status in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients after switching from natalizumab to fingolimod

Background:

Natalizumab significantly reduces the disease activity in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis but due to the risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy it is often discontinued. Fingolimod is seen as an alternative, but there are no long-term analyses of the efficacy of fingolimod in this setting using the no evidence of disease activity (NEDA)-3 criteria. We provide an assessment of patients who discontinued natalizumab and switched to fingolimod or other treatments by evaluating the proportion of patients who fulfil NEDA-3 criteria after prolonged follow-up periods.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective observational study of multiple sclerosis patients, who were treated with continuous natalizumab or who had switched to fingolimod or other treatments after natalizumab discontinuation. We assessed NEDA-3 status, annual relapse rate and determined the odds ratio between disease course after treatment switch and other patient and treatment characteristics.

Results:

A total of 61 patients on continuous natalizumab treatment and 53 patients who switched from natalizumab to fingolimod or other treatments were accompanied for up to 5 years. While the proportion of natalizumab patients fulfilling NEDA-3 criteria remained stable at 90% during the entire follow-up period, the proportion of patients switching to fingolimod or other therapies dropped to 76.7% in the first year after discontinuation, and to 50% in the years thereafter. While the median Expanded Disability Status Scale remained stable and the percentage of relapsing patients did not change significantly, recurring magnetic resonance imaging activity was found in up to 42% of the patients after switching from natalizumab to other treatments. New disease activity was significantly correlated with extended treatment gap between natalizumab discontinuation and the start of a new therapy.

Discussion:

Patients remain clinically stable after discontinuing natalizumab and switching to other therapies. However, when considering NEDA-3 criteria, a considerable proportion of patients show disease reactivation. Careful monitoring and early evaluation of alternatives is necessary after switching from natalizumab to other treatments.

Managing Multiple Sclerosis: Treatment Initiation, Modification, and Sequencing

Recent therapeutic advances in the management of multiple sclerosis (MS) have raised questions about the selection of appropriate patient candidates for various treatments and, if the plan is to move from one treatment to another, the appropriate sequencing of these therapies. The selected approach should provide optimal disease management without limiting future therapeutic options based on safety concerns, and recognize potential future treatments and the possibility of combination therapies. Additional challenges include incorporation of patient needs and preferences into the overall therapeutic approach, in order to ensure optimal outcomes in the short and long term. The objective of this manuscript is to provide an overview of what is currently known regarding the impact of various therapies for MS on future therapeutic choices (sequencing). In this context, we reviewed the available evidence in support of various treatments and, based on the presence of disease activity, suggested a scheme for switching or escalating therapy with the main focus on sequencing of therapeutic approaches.

How much progress has there been in the second-line treatment of multiple sclerosis: A 2017 update

In 1993, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first drug specifically for treating multiple sclerosis (MS). More than two decades later, a dozen such treatments are now available. Of these, four are considered second-line treatments for use in escalation strategies and two new drugs are currently undergoing accreditation procedures. Soon, they will provide clinicians with a range of six effective disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) to thwart the inflammatory processes in MS patients with active disease. However, while such a large number of DMTs for MS can help to control early inflammation, any decisions to be made by clinicians have also been made substantially more complex. This complexity is increased by the lack of head-to-head studies comparing these second-line therapies and the benefit-risk profiles for each of these drugs, which are likely to vary among patients. Ultimately, good awareness of the benefits and, more important, the risks of each MS DMT is crucial for the effective management of inflammation in MS.

A longitudinal real-life comparison study of natalizumab and fingolimod

BACKGROUND

Different retrospective studies compared natalizumab and fingolimod in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), with conflicting results. We aimed to explore the prescriptive attitude and the clinical outcome of the two therapies.

METHODS

We retrospectively included all RRMS patients treated with natalizumab (n=101) or fingolimod (n=78) as their first second-line therapy with at least 24-month follow-up. Demographic and clinical features were recorded to calculate the propensity score (PS). Outcomes of interest were annualized relapse rate (ARR), risk of relapse, and change in the EDSS RESULTS: At baseline, natalizumab patients were younger and had a shorter disease duration, a higher number of relapse in 1 year (1yR) and 2 years (2yR) and overall (ARR-PT) pretherapy, compared to fingolimod patients. On therapy, the proportion of relapsing patients and the mean RR were similar in the two groups. However, the change in the ARR was higher in natalizumab than in fingolimod group (P<.002), but, using PS as a covariate, it was comparable (P=.960). Similarly, the change in EDSS was significantly different for the two groups (P<.004), but not after adjusting for the PS (P=.321).

CONCLUSION

We observed a comparable efficacy on ARR reduction and on EDSS progression with natalizumab and fingolimod correcting through PS, suggesting that the efficacy difference observed before correction might derive from the clinical attitude in prescribing natalizumab in more active MS patients in real life.

Two studies in one: A propensity-score-matched comparison of fingolimod versus interferons and glatiramer acetate using real-world data from the independent German studies, PANGAEA and PEARL

BACKGROUND

This study compared outcomes following fingolimod or BRACE treatments (beta-interferons/glatiramer acetate) in patients with active MS (≥ 1 relapse in the previous year) following previous BRACE treatment.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Patients with active MS who previously received BRACE were identified from German prospective, observational studies, PANGAEA and PEARL. A novel methodology was developed to compare outcomes between propensity-score-matched cohorts (3:1 ratio) from the independent single-arm studies. Patients in PANGAEA (n = 1287) experienced 48% fewer relapses per year than those in PEARL (n = 429; annualized relapse rate ratio: 0.52; p < 0.001). The risk of 3-month or 6-month confirmed disability progression (CDP) was reduced in PANGAEA versus PEARL (3-month: 37% reduction; hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; p < 0.001; 6-month: 47% reduction; HR, 0.53; p < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients in PANGAEA (n = 1234) than PEARL (n = 401) were free from relapses and 3-month (65.7% vs 38.7%; p < 0.001) or 6-month (68.2% vs 39.2%; p < 0.001) CDP. The probability of confirmed disability improvement was higher in PANGAEA (n = 1163) than PEARL (n = 372; 3-month: 175% increase; HR, 2.75; p < 0.001; 6-month: 126% increase; HR, 2.26; p < 0.001). Patients in PANGAEA (n = 149) were less likely than those in PEARL (n = 307) to have taken sick leave (proportion with 0 days off work: 62.4% vs 44.6%; p = 0.0005). For change in disease severity from baseline (assessed by clinicians using the Clinical Global Impressions scale; PANGAEA, n = 1207; PEARL, n = 427), a larger proportion of patients had subjective improvement and a smaller proportion had worsening status in PANGAEA than PEARL (improvement: 28.2% vs 15.2%; worsening: 16.4% vs 30.4%; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Fingolimod appears to be more effective than BRACE in improving clinical and physician-/patient-reported outcomes in individuals with active MS.

Natalizumab versus fingolimod in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis non-responding to first-line injectable therapies

BACKGROUND

Natalizumab and fingolimod have not been compared in controlled trials but only in observational studies, with inconclusive results.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to compare the effect of natalizumab and fingolimod in reducing disease activity in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

METHODS

We included all consecutive RRMS patients switched from first-line agents (glatiramer acetate/interferons) to natalizumab or fingolimod, with a follow-up of 24 months. Data of relapses, Expanded Disability Status Scale score and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were collected. We used propensity score (PS) matching and intention-to-treat analysis.

RESULTS

We retained 102 patients in each cohort after PS matching, with similar baseline characteristics. More patients discontinued natalizumab compared to fingolimod (33% vs 11%, p < 0.001), mainly for progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) concern. No serious adverse events occurred in the two cohorts. Compared to fingolimod, the natalizumab group presented a higher percentage of relapse-free patients (66% vs 80%, p = 0.015), a higher percentage of disability-improved patients (6% vs 15%, p = 0.033), a lower percentage of MRI-active patients (38% vs 14%, p = 0.001) and a higher percentage of patients with no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3; 44% vs 70%, p < 0.001) after 2 years of follow-up. Disability worsening was not statistically different in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Natalizumab is superior to fingolimod in RRMS patients non-responding to first-line agents.

Comparative efficacy of fingolimod vs natalizumab: A French multicenter observational study

OBJECTIVE

To compare natalizumab and fingolimod on both clinical and MRI outcomes in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) from 27 multiple sclerosis centers participating in the French follow-up cohort Observatoire of Multiple Sclerosis.

METHODS

Patients with RRMS included in the study were aged from 18 to 65 years with an Expanded Disability Status Scale score of 0-5.5 and an available brain MRI performed within the year before treatment initiation. The data were collected for 326 patients treated with natalizumab and 303 with fingolimod. The statistical analysis was performed using 2 different methods: logistic regression and propensity scores (inverse probability treatment weighting).

RESULTS

The confounder-adjusted proportion of patients with at least one relapse within the first and second year of treatment was lower in natalizumab-treated patients compared to the fingolimod group (21.1% vs 30.4% at first year, p = 0.0092; and 30.9% vs 41.7% at second year, p = 0.0059) and supported the trend observed in nonadjusted analysis (21.2% vs 27.1% at 1 year, p = 0.0775). Such statistically significant associations were also observed for gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing lesions and new T2 lesions at both 1 year (Gd-enhancing lesions: 9.3% vs 29.8%, p < 0.0001; new T2 lesions: 10.6% vs 29.6%, p < 0.0001) and 2 years (Gd-enhancing lesions: 9.1% vs 22.1%, p = 0.0025; new T2 lesions: 16.9% vs 34.1%, p = 0.0010) post treatment initiation.

CONCLUSION

Taken together, these results suggest the superiority of natalizumab over fingolimod to prevent relapses and new T2 and Gd-enhancing lesions at 1 and 2 years.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with RRMS, natalizumab decreases the proportion of patients with at least one relapse within the first year of treatment compared to fingolimod.

Clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability of fingolimod for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Fingolimod is a selective immunosuppressive agent approved worldwide for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS), a chronic and potentially disabling neurological condition. Randomized double-blind clinical trials have shown that fingolimod significantly reduces relapse rate and ameliorates a number of brain MRI measures, including cerebral atrophy, compared to both placebo and intramuscular interferon-β1a. The effect on disability progression remains controversial, since one Phase III trial showed a significant benefit of treatment while two others did not. Although fingolimod has a very convenient daily oral dosing, the possibility of serious cardiac, ocular, infectious, and other rare adverse events justified the decision of the European Medicines Agency to approve the drug as a second-line treatment for MS patients not responsive to first-line therapy, or those with rapidly evolving course. In the United States, fingolimod is instead authorized as a first-line treatment. The aim of this review is to describe and discuss the characteristics of fingolimod concerning its efficacy, safety, and tolerability in the clinical context of multiple sclerosis management.

Anti-JC virus antibodies in rituximab-treated patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder

Rituximab, a chimeric monoclonal anti-CD20 antibody, has been proposed to be effective for neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). A concern for developing progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML), which is caused by John Cunningham virus (JCV), has been suggested particularly in patients treated long term with rituximab. In this study, using a modified enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay with glutathione S-transferase-tagged VP1 as the antigen, we investigated the seroprevalence of anti-JCV antibodies among 78 Korean patients with NMOSD and the change in anti-JCV antibody serostatus following long-term rituximab treatment. The overall seroprevalence of anti-JCV antibodies was 69 % prior to rituximab administration. Over a mean of 4 years of repeated treatment with rituximab, no patient developed PML. Of 24 initially seronegative patients, none converted into seropositive, whereas six (11 %) of 54 initially seropositive patients converted into seronegative. Our results might support the safety of long-term rituximab treatment in patients with NMOSD with regard to the risk of developing PML.

An update on the use of natalizumab in the treatment of multiple sclerosis: appropriate patient selection and special considerations

In the context of an increasing repertoire of multiple sclerosis (MS) therapeutics, choosing the appropriate treatment for an individual patient is becoming increasingly challenging. Natalizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against alpha4beta1 integrin, has proven short-term and long-term efficacies in terms of relapse rate reduction, prevention of disability progression, and reduction of magnetic resonance imaging-detectable activity. It is well tolerated and has further been shown to improve patients' quality of life. Its use is limited by the risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML), which occurs at an overall incidence of 3.78 cases per 1,000 patients. Three major risk factors for the occurrence of natalizumab-associated PML have been identified: John Cunningham virus (JCV) seropositivity, prior use of immunosuppressants, and treatment duration ≥2 years. Therefore, in patients considered for natalizumab therapy, as well as in patients receiving natalizumab, effective control of MS activity has to be balanced against the risk of an opportunistic central nervous system infection associated with a high risk of significant morbidity or death. Discontinuation of natalizumab is an issue in daily clinical practice, since it is an option to reduce the PML risk. However, after cessation of natalizumab therapy, currently, there is no approved strategy for avoiding postnatalizumab disease reactivation available. In this paper, short-term and long-term safety and efficacy data are reviewed. Issues in daily clinical practice, such as selection of patients, monitoring of patients, and natalizumab discontinuation, are discussed.