Factors determining the treatment ineffectiveness in multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

In patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), the suboptimal response should be well evaluated at every step of treatment.

REVIEW SUMMARY

Determining patients with moderate or high activity and suboptimal response to treatment (clinical variables, MRI activity, perception of the patient and physician, side effects, serious risks, etc.) and timely intervention in the treatment are very important in achieving the desired effectiveness in the long term. Within the early stages, there is a limited time interval for effective treatment of MS patients. During this time, intervention is critical to achieve long-term positive results. After diagnosis, an early and individualized specific treatment for MS, depending on the severity of the disease, can prevent radiological and physical disability in the medium/long term.

CONCLUSIONS

With the emergence of a number of new treatments each with their own benefits and risks, a change in the nature of interactions between patients and MS physicians has been anticipated and will be required in the patient-related clinical decision-making process in the developing MS landscape.

Efficacy and Safety of Oral Therapies for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis

Disease-modifying therapies have now become standard treatment for multiple sclerosis. These include five oral therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, namely fingolimod, dimethyl fumarate, teriflunomide, cladribine, and siponimod, although there is some discrepancy on the relative efficacy and safety of these agents. To gain further insight on these oral agents in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, we performed a narrative review of fingolimod, dimethyl fumarate, teriflunomide, cladribine, and siponimod. We limited the analysis to randomized clinical studies in which a comparator was used (i.e., placebo or other disease-modifying therapy). As relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis is a chronic disease and treatment is lifelong, long-term outcomes were an additional focus. A total of 37 studies met inclusion criteria: 15 for fingolimod, 8 for dimethyl fumarate, 7 for teriflunomide, 4 for cladribine, and 3 for siponimod. All drugs showed some functional and magnetic resonance imaging benefit in nearly all clinical studies. The reduction in annual relapse rate was similar for fingolimod, dimethyl fumarate, and cladribine, and somewhat greater than for teriflunomide; there is limited information on the annual relapse rate for siponimod. For all drugs, the benefits reported at short follow-up times are broadly consistent with those seen at longer follow-up times. For fingolimod and dimethyl fumarate, there was a definite trend towards a progressively lower annual relapse rate with continuing treatment. The safety profile of all five drugs was considered to be acceptable, even after extended treatment. While these results should be treated with caution, they highlight that future head-to-head studies are needed to better understand the long-term benefits of disease-modifying therapies. Such information will be of value when considering the risk-benefit profile of these oral therapies.

European and American Guidelines for Multiple Sclerosis Treatment

The management and treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) is becoming more and more complex as many medications are now available, with different routes of administration, mechanisms of action, and effectiveness and safety profiles. The decision-making process to choose the right medication is a complex task requiring a careful evaluation of the results of clinical and post-marketing studies, and the capability to translate data from clinical studies to patients in everyday clinical practice. Two European neurological societies, the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS) and European Academy of Neurology (EAN), and the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) have recently delivered guidelines for MS treatment, helping neurologists to address the most common clinical issues related to this topic. The two guidelines offer a similar view and similar recommendations for the most relevant and common questions of clinical practice. For some aspects of MS treatment the statements are slightly different, in particular regarding pregnancy management in relation to treatments, the use of mitoxantrone, and the treatment of secondary progressive MS (SP-MS).