Rituximab vs placebo induction prior to glatiramer acetate monotherapy in multiple sclerosis

Clinical trial evidence of quality-of-life effects of disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis: a systematic analysis

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, patients, clinicians, and regulators call for more evidence on the impact of innovative medicines on quality of life (QoL). We assessed the effects of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) on QoL in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS).

METHODS

Randomized trials assessing approved DMTs in PwMS with results for at least one outcome referred to as "quality of life" were searched in PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov.

RESULTS

We identified 38 trials published between 1999 and 2023 with a median of 531 participants (interquartile range (IQR) 202 to 941; total 23,225). The evaluated DMTs were mostly interferon-beta (n = 10; 26%), fingolimod (n = 7; 18%), natalizumab (n = 5; 13%), and glatiramer acetate (n = 4; 11%). The 38 trials used 18 different QoL instruments, with up to 11 QoL subscale measures per trial (median 2; IQR 1-3). QoL was never the single primary outcome. We identified quantitative QoL results in 24 trials (63%), and narrative statements in 15 trials (39%). In 16 trials (42%), at least one of the multiple QoL results was statistically significant. The effect sizes of the significant quantitative QoL results were large (median Cohen's d 1.02; IQR 0.3-1.7; median Hedges' g 1.01; IQR 0.3-1.69) and ranged between d 0.14 and 2.91.

CONCLUSIONS

Certain DMTs have the potential to positively impact QoL of PwMS, and the assessment and reporting of QoL is suboptimal with a multitude of diverse instruments being used. There is an urgent need that design and reporting of clinical trials reflect the critical importance of QoL for PwMS.

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

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

Disease-modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis: A focused review of rituximab

BACKGROUND

Treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS), a chronic inflammatory disease of the central nervous system, has changed drastically in the last 30 years. Several different disease-modifying therapies are now available, with off-label use of the B-cell-depleting antibody rituximab becoming an increasingly popular choice, as more and more studies report on its effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to summarize the current state of evidence for rituximab as a treatment for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS).

METHODS

A structured literature search was conducted in PubMed, focusing on peer-reviewed studies of adult populations with RRMS. Ongoing trials with rituximab in MS were identified through Clinicaltrials.gov and additional references were identified through review articles.

FINDINGS

Despite promising results for rituximab as a treatment of MS, the market-authorization holder switched focus from rituximab and discontinued the industry-sponsored trials programme. However, several observational studies, smaller clinical trials and one large investigator-initiated randomized-controlled trial have continued to report fewer clinical relapses, fewer contrast-enhancing lesions on magnetic resonance imaging and better drug survival with rituximab, compared with MS-approved alternatives.

CONCLUSIONS

Rituximab should be considered as both a first- and second-line therapy option for most MS patients with active, non-progressive disease. However, as an off-label therapy for MS, regulatory approval remains a barrier for wider adoption in many countries.

Systematic review of gender bias in clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

This article analyses the presence of gender bias in clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies used to treat multiple sclerosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review of controlled clinical trials of 4 monoclonal antibodies used to treat multiple sclerosis (natalizumab, rituximab, alemtuzumab, and ocrelizumab). We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE database for articles published in English before March 2020. The study was conducted in accordance with the relevant international recommendations.

RESULTS

The search identified 89 articles, 55 of which met the inclusion criteria. Of all patients included in these trials, 64.6% were women. The lead authors of 10 of the studies were women. Fifteen of the 55 studies included a sex-based analysis of the primary endpoint. Only 8 articles discussed the results separately for men and for women.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical trials of these 4 monoclonal antibodies present a significant gender bias. In most cases, the primary and secondary endpoints are not analyzed according to patient sex, despite the fact that international recommendations include this as a minimum requirement for ensuring scientific validity and obtaining appropriate results for extrapolation to the wider population.

Escalation Versus Induction/High-Efficacy Treatment Strategies for Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis: Which is Best for Patients?

After more than 2 decades of recommending an escalating strategy for the treatment of most patients with multiple sclerosis, there has recently been considerable interest in the use of high-efficacy therapies in the early stage of the disease. Early intervention with induction/high-efficacy disease-modifying therapy may have the best risk-benefit profile for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis who are young and have active disease, numerous focal T2 lesions on spinal and brain magnetic resonance imaging, and no irreversible disability. Although we have no curative treatment, at least seven classes of high-efficacy drugs are available, with two main strategies. The first strategy involves the use of high-efficacy drugs (e.g., natalizumab, sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulators, or anti-CD20 drugs) to achieve sustained immunosuppression. These can be used as a first-line therapy in many countries. The second strategy entails the use of one of the induction drugs (short-term use of mitoxantrone, alemtuzumab, cladribine, or autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant) that are mainly recommended as a second-line or third-line treatment in patients with very active or aggressive multiple sclerosis disease. Early sustained immunosuppression exposes patients to heightened risks of infection and cancer proportionate to cumulative exposure, and induction drugs expose patients to similar risks during the initial post-treatment period, although these risks decrease over time. Their initial potential safety risks should now be revisited, taking account of long-term data and some major changes in their regimens: natalizumab with the long-term monitoring of John Cunningham virus; use of monthly courses of mitoxantrone with maximum cumulative doses of 36-72 mg/m2, followed by a safer disease-modifying drug; cladribine with only 2-weekly treatment courses required in years 1 and 2 and no systematic treatment for the following 2 years; alemtuzumab, whose safety and clinical impacts have now been documented for more than 6 years after the last infusion; and autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplant, which dramatically reduces transplantation-related mortality with a new regimen and guidelines. Escalation and induction/high-efficacy treatments need rigorous magnetic resonance imaging monitoring. Monitoring over the first few years, using the MAGNIMS score or American Academy of Neurology guidelines, considerably improves prediction accuracy and facilitates the selection of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis requiring aggressive treatment.

Current evidence of rituximab in the treatment of multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory demyelinating disorder of the central nervous system. The immunopathology of MS involves both T and B lymphocytes. Rituximab is one of the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapies which deplete B-cells. Although some anti-CD20 therapies have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of MS, rituximab is used off-label. Several studies have shown that rituximab has a good efficacy and safety in MS, including certain specific patient conditions such as treatment-naïve patients, treatment-switching patients, and the Asian population. However, there are still questions about the optimal dose and duration of rituximab in MS due to the different dosing regimens used in each study. Moreover, many biosimilars have become available at a lower cost with comparable physicochemical properties, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity. Thus, rituximab may be considered as a potential therapeutic option for patients without access to standard treatment. This narrative review summarized the evidence of both original and biosimilars of rituximab in MS treatment including pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, safety, and dosing regimen.

What Have Failed, Interrupted, and Withdrawn Antibody Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis Taught Us?

In the past two decades, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have revolutionized the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, a remarkable number of mAbs failed due to negative study results were withdrawn because of unexpected serious adverse events (SAEs) or due to studies being halted for other reasons. While trials with positive outcomes are usually published in prestigious journals, negative trials are merely published as abstracts or not at all. This review summarizes MS mAbs that have either failed in phase II-III trials, have been interrupted for various reasons, or withdrawn from the market since 2015. The main conclusions that can be drawn from these 'negative' experiences are as follows. mAbs that have been proven to be safe in other autoimmune conditions, will not have the same safety profile in MS due to immunopathogenetic differences in these diseases (e.g., daclizumab). Identification of SAEs in clinical trials is difficult highlighting the importance of phase IV studies. Memory B cells are central players in MS immunopathogenesis (e.g., tabalumab). The pathophysiological mechanisms of disease progression are independent of leukocyte 'outside-in' traffic which drives relapses in MS. Therefore, therapies for progressive MS must be able to sufficiently cross the blood-brain barrier. Sufficiently long trial duration and multicomponent outcome measures are important for clinical studies in progressive MS. The success of trials on remyelination-promoting therapies mainly depends on the sufficient high dose of mAb, the optimal readout for 'proof of concept', time of treatment initiation, and appropriate selection of patients. Failed strategies are highly important to better understand assumed immunopathophysiological mechanisms and optimizing future trial designs.

Evolution of Anti-B Cell Therapeutics in Autoimmune Neurological Diseases

B cells have an ever-increasing role in the etiopathology of a number of autoimmune neurological disorders, acting as antigen-presenting cells facilitating antibody production but also as sensors, coordinators, and regulators of the immune response. In particular, B cells can regulate the T cell activation process through their participation in antigen presentation, production of proinflammatory cytokines (bystander activation or suppression), and contribution to ectopic lymphoid aggregates. Such an important interplay between B and T cells makes therapeutic depletion of B cells an attractive treatment strategy. The last decade, anti-B cell therapies using monoclonal antibodies against B cell surface molecules have evolved into a rational approach for successfully treating autoimmune neurological disorders, even when T cells seem to be the main effector cells. The paper summarizes basic aspects of B cell biology, discusses the roles of B cells in neurological autoimmunities, and highlights how the currently available or under development anti-B cell therapeutics exert their action in the wide spectrum and immunologically diverse neurological disorders. The efficacy of the various anti-B cell therapies and practical issues on induction and maintenance therapy is specifically detailed for the treatment of patients with multiple sclerosis, neuromyelitis-spectrum disorders, autoimmune encephalitis and hyperexcitability CNS disorders, autoimmune neuropathies, myasthenia gravis, and inflammatory myopathies. The success of anti-B cell therapies in inducing long-term remission in IgG4 neuroautoimmunities is also highlighted pointing out potential biomarkers for follow-up infusions.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of rituximab versus natalizumab in patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis

Introduction

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory disease in which the myelin sheaths of the nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord, which are responsible for communication, are destroyed and cause physical signs and symptoms. According to studies, anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies have significant results in the treatment of this disease. Thus, the aim of the present study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of rituximab against natalizumab in the patients with RRMS in southern Iran in 2020.

Methods

This is an economic evaluation including cost-effectiveness analysis in which the Markov model with a lifetime horizon was used. The study sample consisted of 120 patients randomly selected from among those referred to the MS Association and the Special Diseases Unit of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. In this study, the costs were collected from a societal perspective, and the outcomes were obtained in the form of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY) and the mean relapse rate. The TreeAge pro 2020 and Excel 2016 software were used for data analysis.

Results

The comparative study of rituximab and natalizumab showed that the patients receiving rituximab had lower costs ($ 58,307.93 vs. $ 354,174.85) and more QALYs (7.77 vs. 7.65). In addition, the incidence of relapse by rituximab was lower compared to natalizumab (1.15 vs. 2.57). The probabilistic one-way sensitivity analysis showed the robustness of the results. The scatter plots also showed that rituximab was more cost-effective for the patients in 100% of the simulations for the threshold of < $ 37,641.

Discussion and conclusion

According to the results of this study, rituximab had higher cost-effectiveness than natalizumab. Therefore, it could be a priority for RRMS patients compared to natalizumab because it reduced treatment costs and increased effectiveness.

Rituximab for the treatment of multiple sclerosis: a review

In the last decades, evidence suggesting the direct or indirect involvement of B cells on multiple sclerosis (MS) pathogenesis has accumulated. The increased amount of data on the efficacy and safety of B-cell-depleting therapies from several studies has suggested the addition of these drugs as treatment options to the current armamentarium of disease modifying therapies (DMTs) for MS. Particularly, rituximab (RTX), a chimeric monoclonal antibody directed at CD20 positive B lymphocytes resulting in cell-mediated apoptosis, has been demonstrated to reduce inflammatory activity, incidence of relapses and new brain lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). Additional evidence also demonstrated that patients with progressive MS (PMS) may benefit from RTX, which also showed to be well tolerated, with acceptable safety risks and favorable cost-effectiveness profile.Despite these encouraging results, RTX is currently approved for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, several forms of vasculitis and rheumatoid arthritis, while it can only be administered off-label for MS treatment. Between Northern European countries exist different rules for using not licensed drug for treating MS. The Sweden MS register reports a high rate (53.5%) of off-label RTX prescriptions in relation to other annually started DMTs to treat MS patients, while Danish and Norwegian neurologists have to use other anti-CD20 drugs, as ocrelizumab, in most of the cases.In this paper, we review the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, safety profile and cost effectiveness aspects of RTX for the treatment of MS. Particularly, with the approval of new anti-CD20 DMTs, the recent worldwide COVID-19 emergency and the possible increased risk of infection with this class of drugs, this review sheds light on the use of RTX as an alternative treatment option for MS management, while commenting the gaps of knowledge regarding this drug.

The comparative efficacy and safety of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: A network meta-analysis

With the recent successful targeting of B lymphocytes in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), treatment with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) may represent a promising managemental approach, particularly for those with relapsing/remitting MS (RRMS). A network meta-analysis was conducted based on a comprehensive search in Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of currently available anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), including rituximab, ocrelizumab, and ofatumumab, versus a common comparator (interferon beta-1a [INFβ-1a]) in RRMS patients recruited in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). In a frequentist network meta-analytical model, annualized relapse rates (ARRs) and safety outcomes were expressed as risk ratios (RRs), whereas relapse-free events were expressed as odds ratios (ORs). Treatment ranking was performed using P-scores. The certainty of evidence was appraised using the GRADE approach. Five publications reported the outcomes of seven RCTs (3938 patients, 67.09% females). Compared to INFβ-1a, ocrelizumab reduced the risk of ARR (RR = 0.56, 95% CI, 0.50-0.64), serious adverse events (RR = 0.17, 95% CI, 0.09-0.30), and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (SAEs, RR = 0.60, 95% CI, 0.39-0.93), and it was associated with higher odds of no relapses (OR = 2.47, 95% CI, 2.00-3.05). Ocrelizumab ranked best among all other treatments in terms of reducing ARR and SAEs. The quality of evidence was low for ocrelizumab, low to moderate for rituximab, and high for ofatumumab. Further large-sized, well-designed RCTs are needed to corroborate the efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab and other anti-CD20 mAbs in RRMS.

Rituximab for people with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is the most common neurological cause of disability in young adults. Off-label rituximab for MS is used in most countries surveyed by the International Federation of MS, including high-income countries where on-label disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) are available.  OBJECTIVES: To assess beneficial and adverse effects of rituximab as 'first choice' and as 'switching' for adults with MS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and trial registers for completed and ongoing studies on 31 January 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) comparing rituximab with placebo or another DMT for adults with MS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We used the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. We rated the certainty of evidence using GRADE for: disability worsening, relapse, serious adverse events (SAEs), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), common infections, cancer, and mortality. We conducted separate analyses for rituximab as 'first choice' or as 'switching', relapsing or progressive MS, comparison versus placebo or another DMT, and RCTs or NRSIs.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies (5 RCTs, 10 NRSIs) with 16,429 participants of whom 13,143 were relapsing MS and 3286 progressive MS. The studies were one to two years long and compared rituximab as 'first choice' with placebo (1 RCT) or other DMTs (1 NRSI), rituximab as 'switching' against placebo (2 RCTs) or other DMTs (2 RCTs, 9 NRSIs). The studies were conducted worldwide; most originated from high-income countries, six from the Swedish MS register. Pharmaceutical companies funded two studies. We identified 14 ongoing studies. Rituximab as 'first choice' for relapsing MS Rituximab versus placebo: no studies met eligibility criteria for this comparison. Rituximab versus other DMTs: one NRSI compared rituximab with interferon beta or glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, natalizumab, or fingolimod in active relapsing MS at 24 months' follow-up. Rituximab likely results in a large reduction in relapses compared with interferon beta or glatiramer acetate (hazard ratio (HR) 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.39; 335 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Rituximab may reduce relapses compared with dimethyl fumarate (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.00; 206 participants; low-certainty evidence) and natalizumab (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.00; 170 participants; low-certainty evidence). It may make little or no difference on relapse compared with fingolimod (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.69; 137 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study reported no deaths over 24 months. The study did not measure disability worsening, SAEs, HRQoL, and common infections. Rituximab as 'first choice' for progressive MS One RCT compared rituximab with placebo in primary progressive MS at 24 months' follow-up. Rituximab likely results in little to no difference in the number of participants who have disability worsening compared with placebo (odds ratio (OR) 0.71, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.11; 439 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Rituximab may result in little to no difference in recurrence of relapses (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.99; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence), SAEs (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.20; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence), common infections (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.73; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence), cancer (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.07 to 3.59; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence), and mortality (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.02 to 2.77; 439 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure HRQoL. Rituximab versus other DMTs: no studies met eligibility criteria for this comparison. Rituximab as 'switching' for relapsing MS  One RCT compared rituximab with placebo in relapsing MS at 12 months' follow-up. Rituximab may decrease recurrence of relapses compared with placebo (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.93; 104 participants; low-certainty evidence). The data did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of rituximab relative to placebo on SAEs (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.92; 104 participants; very low-certainty evidence), common infections (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.24; 104 participants; very low-certainty evidence), cancer (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.06 to 39.15; 104 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and mortality (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.06 to 39.15; 104 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure disability worsening and HRQoL.  Five NRSIs compared rituximab with other DMTs in relapsing MS at 24 months' follow-up. The data did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of rituximab relative to interferon beta or glatiramer acetate on disability worsening (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.42; 1 NRSI, 853 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Rituximab likely results in a large reduction in relapses compared with interferon beta or glatiramer acetate (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49; 1 NRSI, 1383 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and fingolimod (HR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.32; 1 NRSI, 256 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The data did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of rituximab relative to natalizumab on relapses (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.2 to 5.0; 1 NRSI, 153 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Rituximab likely increases slightly common infections compared with interferon beta or glatiramer acetate (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.62; 1 NRSI, 5477 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and compared with natalizumab (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.32; 2 NRSIs, 5001 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Rituximab may increase slightly common infections compared with fingolimod (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.77; 3 NRSIs, 5187 participants; low-certainty evidence). It may make little or no difference compared with ocrelizumab (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.40; 1 NRSI, 472 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The data did not confirm or exclude a beneficial or detrimental effect of rituximab on mortality compared with fingolimod (OR 5.59, 95% CI 0.22 to 139.89; 1 NRSI, 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and natalizumab (OR 6.66, 95% CI 0.27 to 166.58; 1 NRSI, 153 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The included studies did not measure SAEs, HRQoL, and cancer.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For preventing relapses in relapsing MS, rituximab as 'first choice' and as 'switching' may compare favourably with a wide range of approved DMTs. A protective effect of rituximab against disability worsening is uncertain. There is limited information to determine the effect of rituximab for progressive MS.  The evidence is uncertain about the effect of rituximab on SAEs. They are relatively rare in people with MS, thus difficult to study, and they were not well reported in studies. There is an increased risk of common infections with rituximab, but absolute risk is small.  Rituximab is widely used as off-label treatment in people with MS; however, randomised evidence is weak. In the absence of randomised evidence, remaining uncertainties on beneficial and adverse effects of rituximab for MS might be clarified by making real-world data available.

Anti-CD20 therapies for multiple sclerosis: current status and future perspectives

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory, demyelinating and neurodegenerative disease affecting the central nervous system (CNS), often characterized by the accumulation of irreversible clinical disability over time. During last years, there has been a dramatic evolution in several key concepts of immune pathophysiology of MS and in the treatment of this disease. The demonstration of the strong efficacy and good safety profile of selective B-cell-depleting therapies (such as anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies) has significantly expanded the therapeutic scenario for both relapsing and progressive MS patients with the identification of a new therapeutic target. The key role of B cells in triggering MS disease has been also pointed out, determining a shift from the traditional view of MS activity as largely being ‘T-cell mediated’ to the notion that MS-related pathological processes involve bi-directional interactions between several immune cell types, including B cells, both in the periphery and in the CNS. This review provides an updated overview of the involvement of B cells in the immune pathophysiology and pathology of MS. We summarize the rationale regarding the use of anti-CD20 therapies and the results of the main randomized controlled trials and observational studies investigating the efficacy and safety profile of rituximab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab and ublituximab. Suggestions regarding vaccinations and management of MS patients during COVID-19 pandemic with anti-CD20 therapies are also discussed. Finally, therapies under investigation and future perspectives of anti-CD20 therapies are taken into consideration.

Cells to the Rescue: Emerging Cell-Based Treatment Approaches for NMOSD and MOGAD

Cell-based therapies are gaining momentum as promising treatments for rare neurological autoimmune diseases, including neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders and myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease. The development of targeted cell therapies is hampered by the lack of adequate animal models that mirror the human disease. Most cell-based treatments, including HSCT, CAR-T cell, tolerogenic dendritic cell and mesenchymal stem cell treatment have entered early stage clinical trials or have been used as rescue treatment in treatment-refractory cases. The development of antigen-specific cell-based immunotherapies for autoimmune diseases is slowed down by the rarity of the diseases, the lack of surrogate outcomes and biomarkers that are able to predict long-term outcomes and/or therapy effectiveness as well as challenges in the manufacturing of cellular products. These challenges are likely to be overcome by future research.

Rituximab in Multiple Sclerosis: Are We Ready for Regulatory Approval?

Despite the availability of a lot of effective disease-modifying drugs, multiple sclerosis (MS) (in particular the progressive forms) still represents an important unmet medical need, because of issues in terms of effectiveness, duration of response, safety, and patient compliance. An increasing body of evidence from randomized clinical trials and real-world data suggest that rituximab is a highly effective alternative in both relapsing and progressive MS, with a low discontinuation rate, related to a good benefit/risk profile, and a good compliance. To date, the use of rituximab in patients with multiple sclerosis is not in accordance with the authorized product information (off-label use). However, the use of this medicine is widespread in several countries, and in some cases, it is the most commonly used disease-modifying drug for MS subtypes. This use could be officially recognized by national regulatory authorities, according to specific procedures, to ensure equal access for patients to a safe and effective option.

Systematic review of gender bias in clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

This article analyses the presence of gender bias in clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies used to treat multiple sclerosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review of controlled clinical trials of 4 monoclonal antibodies used to treat multiple sclerosis (natalizumab, rituximab, alemtuzumab, and ocrelizumab). We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE database for articles published in English before March 2020. The study was conducted in accordance with the relevant international recommendations.

RESULTS

The search identified 89 articles, 55 of which met the inclusion criteria. Of all patients included in these trials, 64.6% were women. The lead authors of 10 of the studies were women. Fifteen of the 55 studies included a sex-based analysis of the primary endpoint. Only 8 articles discussed the results separately for men and for women.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical trials of these 4 monoclonal antibodies present a significant gender bias. In most cases, the primary and secondary endpoints are not analyzed according to patient sex, despite the fact that international recommendations include this as a minimum requirement for ensuring scientific validity and obtaining appropriate results for extrapolation to the wider population.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the development of multiple sclerosis in clinically isolated syndrome

Clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) usually describes a first clinical episode that suggest multiple sclerosis. One of the signs and symptoms of CIS is Optic neuritis (ON). Several early intervention drugs are being tested in clinical trials for the early intervention in CIS patients which may lead to multiple sclerosis (MS). This study aim (1) early intervention of the CIS progression to MS delay slow down the MS progression, (2) since that ON affects 30%-70% of MS patients, the available ON intervention delay the MS progression. PubMed was used as a search engine. Summary relative risks (RRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a random-effect model. For aim 1, it showed lower risk of progression to MS compared to non-treated group (Risk Ratio (RR) 0.64; 95%CI: 0.58, 0.69; p < 0.001). For aim 2, drug treated group showed lower risk of progression compared to non-treated group (RR 0.19, 95%CI: 0.06, 0.54, p < 0.002. Statistical heterogeneity was not significant in both outcomes and bias of publication was not found using inspection of funnel plot and Egger's statistical test in both outcomes. In conclusion, early treatment should be considered in CIS patients to prevent the progression of MS. Moreover, this data shows that early intervention (Erythropoietin, Ery) of ON decreases the conversion risk to MS.

Rituximab, MS, and pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

To describe the safety and efficacy of rituximab (RTX) in MS and pregnancy, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 74 pregnancies among 55 women treated with RTX for MS and their offspring.

METHODS

We used prospectively collected information from the electronic health record at Kaiser Permanente Southern California between 2012 and 2019 of mother and baby to identify treatment history, pregnancy outcomes, and relapses.

RESULTS

Last RTX exposure before conception occurred between 1.8 and 5.2 months in 32 (49%) of 65 pregnancies and accidentally during the first trimester in 9 (12%). Among 38 live births, adverse pregnancy outcomes were as follows: 3 preterm deliveries (including 1 set of twins), 1 neonatal death (preterm twin), and 1 perinatal stroke (full-term). No stillbirths, chorioamnionitis, or major malformations were found. Fifteen (27%) women had at least one first-trimester miscarriage, of whom 8 (53%) had a history of infertility. Cumulative dose or timing of last RTX infusion was not associated with an increased risk of miscarriage. Only 2 (5.4%) women experienced relapses, one during pregnancy and the other postpartum.

CONCLUSION

We observed no increase in adverse pregnancy outcomes compared with expected national incidence rates and remarkably little disease activity in RTX-treated women with MS, particularly when compared with periconceptional natalizumab-treated cohorts. However, larger studies are needed to fully assess the safety of RTX use before pregnancy, especially risks associated with prolonged B-cell depletion and hypogammaglobulinemia. Until these data are available, we recommend restricting RTX use before pregnancy to women who require highly effective MS treatments.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class IV evidence that for pregnant women with MS, RTX controls disease activity and does not increase adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Glatiramer acetate immune modulates B-cell antigen presentation in treatment of MS

Objective

We examined the effect of glatiramer acetate (GA) on B-cell maturation, differentiation, and antigen presentation in MS and experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE).

Methods

A cross-sectional study of blood samples from 20 GA-treated and 18 untreated patients with MS was performed by flow cytometry; 6 GA-treated patients with MS were analyzed longitudinally. GA-mediated effects on B-cell antigen-presenting function were investigated in EAE, or, alternatively, B cells were treated with GA in vitro using vehicle as a control.

Results

In MS, GA diminished transitional B-cell and plasmablast frequency, downregulated CD69, CD25, and CD95 expression, and decreased TNF-α production, whereas IL-10 secretion and MHC Class II expression were increased. In EAE, we observed an equivalent dampening of proinflammatory B-cell properties and an enhanced expression of MHC Class II. When used as antigen-presenting cells for activation of naive T cells, GA-treated B cells promoted development of regulatory T cells, whereas proinflammatory T-cell differentiation was diminished.

Conclusions

GA immune modulates B-cell function in EAE and MS and efficiently interferes with pathogenic B cell–T cell interaction.

Current therapeutic landscape in multiple sclerosis: an evolving treatment paradigm

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To critically assess the current landscape of disease-modifying agents for multiple sclerosis (MS). Treatment algorithms will be discussed and studies for new agents in late development or recently approved are analyzed in terms of their impact on current treatment strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

A real-world study from Wales suggests that early initiation of highly effective therapy may provide more benefit that an escalation approach in relapsing MS. A study from the MSBase dataset found evidence that early treatment with highly effective therapies decreased the risk of developing secondary progressive MS. Ocrelizumab is highly efficacious in relapsing MS and in a group of patients with primary progressive MS. Another CD20 directed mAb, ofatumumab, is in phase 3. A large study examining extended interval dosing of natalizumab in an attempt to decrease the risk of developing progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy is underway. Cladribine and alemtuzumab may work by immune reconstitution. Siponimod was recently approved by United States Federal Drug Administration for relapsing MS and active secondary progressive MS. Other S1P receptor modulators are being studied in phase 3 trials for relapsing MS. Cladribine received FDA approval as treatment for relapsing and active secondary progressive MS. Autologous hematopoetic stem-cell transplantation may be an option for treatment-refractory MS.

SUMMARY

Development of disease-modifying agents in MS continues to be successful. Treatment algorithms need to take new developments into account.

Rituximab treatment for multiple sclerosis

Rituximab, a chimeric anti-CD20-antibody, attracts increasing attention as a treatment option for multiple sclerosis (MS). Apart from smaller controlled trials, an increasing number of studies in real-world populations indicate high efficacy based on clinical and neuroradiological outcomes for rituximab in relapsing-remitting MS patients. Additional evidence also demonstrates efficacy of rituximab with treatment of progressive MS phenotypes. In this topical review, we summarize and discuss current evidence on mechanisms of action, efficacy, safety, tolerance and other clinical aspects of rituximab in the treatment of MS. Finally, we will highlight current knowledge gaps and the need for comparative studies with other disease-modifying therapies in MS.