Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different therapeutic strategies are available for the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), including immunomodulators, immunosuppressants and biological agents. Although each one of these therapies reduces relapse frequency and slows disability accumulation compared to no treatment, their relative benefit remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety, through network meta-analysis, of interferon beta-1b, interferon beta-1a, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab, pegylated interferon beta-1a, daclizumab, laquinimod, azathioprine, immunoglobulins, cladribine, cyclophosphamide, diroximel fumarate, fludarabine, interferon beta 1-a and beta 1-b, leflunomide, methotrexate, minocycline, mycophenolate mofetil, ofatumumab, ozanimod, ponesimod, rituximab, siponimod and steroids for the treatment of people with RRMS.

SEARCH METHODS

CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers were searched on 21 September 2021 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. A top-up search was conducted on 8 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that studied one or more of the available immunomodulators and immunosuppressants as monotherapy in comparison to placebo or to another active agent, in adults with RRMS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We considered both direct and indirect evidence and performed data synthesis by pairwise and network meta-analysis. Certainty of the evidence was assessed by the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 50 studies involving 36,541 participants (68.6% female and 31.4% male). Median treatment duration was 24 months, and 25 (50%) studies were placebo-controlled. Considering the risk of bias, the most frequent concern was related to the role of the sponsor in the authorship of the study report or in data management and analysis, for which we judged 68% of the studies were at high risk of other bias. The other frequent concerns were performance bias (34% judged as having high risk) and attrition bias (32% judged as having high risk). Placebo was used as the common comparator for network analysis. Relapses over 12 months: data were provided in 18 studies (9310 participants). Natalizumab results in a large reduction of people with relapses at 12 months (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.63; high-certainty evidence). Fingolimod (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.57; moderate-certainty evidence), daclizumab (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73; moderate-certainty evidence), and immunoglobulins (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.79; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a large reduction of people with relapses at 12 months. Relapses over 24 months: data were reported in 28 studies (19,869 participants). Cladribine (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.64; high-certainty evidence), alemtuzumab (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.68; high-certainty evidence) and natalizumab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.65; high-certainty evidence) result in a large decrease of people with relapses at 24 months. Fingolimod (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.60; moderate-certainty evidence), dimethyl fumarate (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.70; moderate-certainty evidence), and ponesimod (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.70; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a large decrease of people with relapses at 24 months. Glatiramer acetate (RR 0.84, 95%, CI 0.76 to 0.93; moderate-certainty evidence) and interferon beta-1a (Avonex, Rebif) (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.91; moderate-certainty evidence) probably moderately decrease people with relapses at 24 months. Relapses over 36 months findings were available from five studies (3087 participants). None of the treatments assessed showed moderate- or high-certainty evidence compared to placebo. Disability worsening over 24 months was assessed in 31 studies (24,303 participants). Natalizumab probably results in a large reduction of disability worsening (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.75; moderate-certainty evidence) at 24 months. Disability worsening over 36 months was assessed in three studies (2684 participants) but none of the studies used placebo as the comparator. Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events data were available from 43 studies (35,410 participants). Alemtuzumab probably results in a slight reduction of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.79; moderate-certainty evidence). Daclizumab (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.40 to 4.63; moderate-certainty evidence), fingolimod (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.57; moderate-certainty evidence), teriflunomide (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.79; moderate-certainty evidence), interferon beta-1a (OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.20; moderate-certainty evidence), laquinimod (OR 1.49, 95 % CI 1.00 to 2.15; moderate-certainty evidence), natalizumab (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.05), and glatiramer acetate (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.14; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a slight increase in the number of people who discontinue treatment due to adverse events. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in 35 studies (33,998 participants). There was probably a trivial reduction in SAEs amongst people with RRMS treated with interferon beta-1b as compared to placebo (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.54; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are highly confident that, compared to placebo, two-year treatment with natalizumab, cladribine, or alemtuzumab decreases relapses more than with other DMTs. We are moderately confident that a two-year treatment with natalizumab may slow disability progression. Compared to those on placebo, people with RRMS treated with most of the assessed DMTs showed a higher frequency of treatment discontinuation due to AEs: we are moderately confident that this could happen with fingolimod, teriflunomide, interferon beta-1a, laquinimod, natalizumab and daclizumab, while our certainty with other DMTs is lower. We are also moderately certain that treatment with alemtuzumab is associated with fewer discontinuations due to adverse events than placebo, and moderately certain that interferon beta-1b probably results in a slight reduction in people who experience serious adverse events, but our certainty with regard to other DMTs is lower. Insufficient evidence is available to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DMTs in a longer term than two years, and this is a relevant issue for a chronic condition like MS that develops over decades. More than half of the included studies were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and this may have influenced their results. Further studies should focus on direct comparison between active agents, with follow-up of at least three years, and assess other patient-relevant outcomes, such as quality of life and cognitive status, with particular focus on the impact of sex/gender on treatment effects.

The benefits and risks of escalation versus early highly effective treatment in patients with multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

Multiple sclerosis is a chronic, demyelinating, inflammatory, and neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system that affects over 2 million people worldwide. Considerable advances have been made in the availability of disease modifying therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis since their introduction in the 1990s. This has led to debate regarding the optimal first-line treatment approach: a strategy of escalation versus early highly effective treatment.

AREAS COVERED

This review defines the strategies of escalation and early highly effective treatment, outlines the pros and cons of each, and provides an analysis of both the current literature and expected future directions of the field.

EXPERT OPINION

There is growing support for using early highly effective treatment as the initial therapeutic approach in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. However, much of this support stems from observational real-world studies that use historic data and lack safety outcomes or randomized control trials that compare individual high versus low-moderate efficacy therapies, instead of the approaches themselves. Randomized control trials (DELIVER-MS, TREAT-MS) are needed to systemically and prospectively compare contemporary escalation versus early highly effective treatment approaches.

Safety and efficacy of daclizumab beta in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis in a 5-year open-label study (EXTEND): final results following early termination

Background:

EXTEND (NCT01797965), an open-label extension study, evaluated the safety and efficacy of daclizumab beta in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) who had completed the randomized DECIDE study.

Methods:

Eligible participants who received either daclizumab beta or interferon beta-1a in DECIDE received daclizumab beta 150 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks for up to 5 years in EXTEND, followed by 24 weeks of post-dosing follow-up. Safety and tolerability were evaluated, as were clinical efficacy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). EXTEND was terminated ahead of schedule by the sponsors.

Results:

The total safety population (N = 1203) received at least one dose of daclizumab beta in EXTEND. In the DECIDE and EXTEND combined periods, the median number of doses of daclizumab beta was 53; median time on treatment was 196 weeks. By 24 September 2018, the end of the study, 110/1203 (9%) participants had completed the protocol-specified treatment period and 1101/1203 (92%) had experienced an adverse event (AE). The most commonly reported AEs were MS relapse, nasopharyngitis, and upper respiratory tract infection. Hepatic events (18%), cutaneous events (45%), and infections (62%) were common treatment-related AEs. The incidence of serious AEs was 29%, most commonly MS relapse and infections. The incidence of immune-mediated disorders was 2%; three of seven were encephalitis. Two of six deaths were considered treatment related. In participants who received continuous daclizumab beta throughout DECIDE and EXTEND, the treatment effects on clinical and MRI outcomes were maintained for up to 6 years.

Conclusion:

Results from the combined DECIDE-EXTEND study elucidate outcomes of longer-term treatment with daclizumab beta in the clinical trial setting and underscore the importance of pharmacovigilance with immunomodulatory therapies in the real-world setting.

Risks and risk management in modern multiple sclerosis immunotherapeutic treatment

In recent years, there has been a paradigm shift in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) owing to the approval of a number of new drugs with very distinct mechanisms of action. All approved disease-modifying drugs primarily work directly on the immune system. However, the identification of an ‘optimal choice’ for individual patients with regard to treatment efficacy, treatment adherence and side-effect profile has become increasingly complex including conceptual as well as practical considerations. Similarly, there are peculiarities and specific requirements with regard to treatment monitoring, especially in relation to immunosuppression, the development of secondary immune-related complications, as well as the existence of drug-specific on- and off-target effects. Both classical immunosuppression and selective immune interventions generate a spectrum of potential therapy-related complications. This article provides a comprehensive overview of available immunotherapeutics for MS and their risks, detailing individual mechanisms of action and side-effect profiles. Furthermore, practical recommendations for patients treated with modern MS immunotherapeutics are provided.

Peginterferon β-1a every 2 weeks increased achievement of no evidence of disease activity over 4 years in the ADVANCE and ATTAIN studies in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Background:

No evidence of disease activity (NEDA) is a composite measurement, incorporating clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) elements of disease activity to sensitively evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of treatments for relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

Objective:

To assess the NEDA status of patients treated with peginterferon β-1a in the ADVANCE and ATTAIN studies and explore its predictive value on longer-term clinical outcomes.

Methods:

ATTAIN was a 2-year extension of the pivotal 2-year ADVANCE study of peginterferon β-1a for RRMS. Achievement of clinical NEDA, MRI NEDA, or overall NEDA was calculated cumulatively and by year over 4 years. Clinical outcomes during ATTAIN were analyzed based on NEDA status at the end of ADVANCE.

Results:

Significantly more patients treated with peginterferon β-1a every 2 weeks than every 4 weeks achieved clinical NEDA (60.6% versus 50.6%, p = 0.0063) and MRI NEDA (28.3% versus 15.8%, p = 0.0005) through year 4 and overall NEDA through year 3 (20.9% versus 13.9%, p = 0.0160). Over 4 years, 15.8% of patients in the every 2 weeks group and 10.7% of patients in the every 4 weeks group maintained overall NEDA (p = 0.0584). Achievement of clinical NEDA, MRI NEDA, or overall NEDA in ADVANCE was predictive of annualized relapse rate in ATTAIN; achievement of clinical NEDA in ADVANCE was also predictive of NEDA achievement and confirmed disability worsening in ATTAIN.

Conclusions:

Peginterferon β-1a every 2 weeks is associated with higher levels of NEDA compared with placebo in year 1 or peginterferon β-1a every 4 weeks in years 2–4. Overall NEDA within the first 2 years of treatment may be prognostic of long-term clinical outcomes.

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01332019

Permeability of the blood-brain barrier predicts no evidence of disease activity at 2 years after natalizumab or fingolimod treatment in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability, as measured by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI), can provide early detection of suboptimal treatment response in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

METHODS

Thirty-five RRMS patients starting on fingolimod or natalizumab, drugs with a common effect of decreasing lymphocyte influx into the central nervous system, were scanned with DCE-MRI at 3T prior to treatment and at 3 and 6 months posttreatment. We calculated the influx constant Ki , a measure of BBB permeability, using the Patlak model. Suboptimal treatment response was defined as loss of no evidence of disease activity (NEDA) status after 2 years of treatment.

RESULTS

Subjects with loss of NEDA status at 2 years had a 51% higher mean Ki in normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) measured after 6 months of treatment, compared to subjects with maintained NEDA status (mean difference = 0.06ml/100g/min, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02-0.09, p = 0.002). Ki in NAWM at 6 months was a good predictor of loss of NEDA status at 2 years (area under the curve = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.70-0.99, p = 0.003), and a value above 0.136ml/100/g/min yielded an odds ratio of 12.4 for suboptimal treatment response at 2 years, with a sensitivity of 73% and a specificity of 82%.

INTERPRETATION

Our results suggest that BBB permeability as measured by DCE-MRI reliably predicts suboptimal treatment response and is a surrogate marker of the state of health of the BBB. We find a predictive threshold for disease activity, which is remarkably identical in clinically isolated syndrome as previously reported and established RRMS as investigated here. Ann Neurol 2018;83:902-914.

Recent developments in interferon-based therapies for multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic and disabling immune-mediated disease of the central nervous system. Beta-interferons are the first approved and still the most widely used first-line disease-modifying treatment in MS.

AREAS COVERED

Here we focus on recent developments in pharmacology and delivery systems of beta-interferons, and discuss their place within current state of the art therapeutic approaches. We briefly review the clinical trials for classical and PEGylated formulations, emphasizing effectiveness, safety concerns, and tolerability. The mechanisms of action of IFN-β in view of MS pathogenesis are also debated

EXPERT OPINION

Though only modestly efficient in reducing the annualized relapse rate, beta-interferons remain a valid first-line option due to their good long-term safety profile and cost-efficacy. Moreover, they are endogenous class II cytokines essential for mounting an effective antiviral response, and they may interact with putative MS triggering factors such as Epstein-Barr virus infection and human endogenous retroviruses. Recent improvements in formulations, delivery devices and drug regimens tackle the tolerability and adherence issues frequently seen with these drugs, and scientific advances may offer means for a better selection of patients. Although a well-established immunomodulatory treatment, beta-interferons have not said their last word in the management of MS.

No evidence of disease activity (NEDA) analysis by epochs in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis treated with ocrelizumab vs interferon beta-1a

Background

No evidence of disease activity (NEDA; defined as no 12-week confirmed disability progression, no protocol-defined relapses, no new/enlarging T2 lesions and no T1 gadolinium-enhancing lesions) using a fixed-study entry baseline is commonly used as a treatment outcome in multiple sclerosis (MS).

Objective

The objective of this paper is to assess the effect of ocrelizumab on NEDA using re-baselining analysis, and the predictive value of NEDA status.

Methods

NEDA was assessed in a modified intent-to-treat population (n = 1520) from the pooled OPERA I and OPERA II studies over various epochs in patients with relapsing MS receiving ocrelizumab (600 mg) or interferon beta-1a (IFN β‐1a; 44 μg).

Results

NEDA was increased with ocrelizumab vs IFN β-1a over 96 weeks by 75% (p < 0.001), from Week 0‒24 by 33% (p < 0.001) and from Week 24‒96 by 72% (p < 0.001). Among patients with disease activity during Weeks 0‒24, 66.4% vs 24.3% achieved NEDA during Weeks 24‒96 in the ocrelizumab and IFN β-1a groups (relative increase: 177%; p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Superior efficacy with ocrelizumab compared with IFN β-1a was consistently seen in maintaining NEDA status in all epochs evaluated. By contrast with IFN β-1a, the majority of patients with disease activity early in the study subsequently attained NEDA status with ocrelizumab.

Pharmacokinetic drug evaluation of daclizumab for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system. Despite the availability of several disease-modifying therapies for relapsing MS, there is a need for highly efficacious targeted therapy with a favorable benefit-risk profile and a high level of treatment adherence. Daclizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CD25, the α subunit of the high-affinity interleukin 2 (IL-2) receptor, that reversibly modulates IL-2 signaling. Areas covered: Daclizumab blocks the activation and expansion of autoreactive T cells that plays a role in the immune pathogenesis of MS. As its modulatory effects on the immune system, daclizumab's potential for use in MS was tested extensively showing a high efficacy in reducing relapse rate, disability progression and the number and volume of gadolinium-enhancing lesions on brain magnetic resonance imaging. Moreover, phase II and III trials showed a favorable pharmacokinetic (PK) profile with slow clearance, linear pharmacokinetics at doses above 100 mg and high subcutaneous bioavailability, not influenced by age, sex or other clinical parameters. Expert opinion: Among the new emerging drugs for MS, daclizumab also, thanks to a favorable PK profile, may represent an interesting and promising therapeutic option in the wide MS therapies armamentarium.

Daclizumab for the treatment of multiple sclerosis

Daclizumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets the α-chain of the IL-2 receptor. Results of Phase II and III clinical trials showed efficacy of daclizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, with reduction of annualized relapse rate by 50–54% versus placebo and 45% versus intramuscular IFN-β-1a. Certain aspects of the immunomodulatory mode of action of daclizumab were only discovered during its clinical development, such as the expansion of a subpopulation of natural killer cells. In this article, we outline the putative mechanisms of action and the key clinical data on daclizumab, with a focus on the efficacy and safety profile. We also evaluate its potential role in future treatment algorithms of multiple sclerosis.

Therapeutic Targets for Multiple Sclerosis: Current Treatment Goals and Future Directions

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune demyelinating disease of the central nervous system, and the most common cause of nontraumatic disability in young adults. Most patients have a relapsing-remitting course, and roughly half of them will eventually enter a degenerative progressive phase, marked by gradual accrual of disability over time in the absence of relapses. Early initiation of treatment has delayed the onset of disability progression. Thus, there is increased interest in treating to target in MS, particularly targeting no evidence of disease activity. This review will describe the most common treatment goals in MS: the Rio scores, disease-free survival, and no evidence of disease activity. We will also cover how well current disease-modifying therapies achieve no evidence of disease activity, and discuss future options for improving MS treatment targets.

Current concepts in multiple sclerosis therapy

Over the past 20 years, the available therapies for multiple sclerosis have expanded exponentially. With several more agents likely to be approved for public funding in Australia in the next 12 months on top of the existing multitude of Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme-subsidized therapies, the choice is becoming even more complex. This review summarizes the current state of available therapies and anticipates likely future directions, including an important focus on contemporary symptom management. For each agent, the major trials, side effects, and clinical utility are summarized, with a particular focus on the Australian experience of these therapies. It is hoped this review provides an up-to-date reference of the exciting current state of multiple sclerosis therapy.