-
Multiple Sclerosis (Houndmills,... Jul 2023With the new highly active drugs available for people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS), vaccination becomes an essential part of the risk management strategy. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
With the new highly active drugs available for people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS), vaccination becomes an essential part of the risk management strategy.
OBJECTIVE
To develop a European evidence-based consensus for the vaccination strategy of pwMS who are candidates for disease-modifying therapies (DMTs).
METHODS
This work was conducted by a multidisciplinary working group using formal consensus methodology. Clinical questions (defined as population, interventions, and outcomes) considered all authorized DMTs and vaccines. A systematic literature search was conducted and quality of evidence was defined according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence. The recommendations were formulated based on the quality of evidence and the risk-benefit balance.
RESULTS
Seven questions, encompassing vaccine safety, vaccine effectiveness, global vaccination strategy and vaccination in sub-populations (pediatric, pregnant women, elderly and international travelers) were considered. A narrative description of the evidence considering published studies, guidelines, and position statements is presented. A total of 53 recommendations were agreed by the working group after three rounds of consensus.
CONCLUSION
This first European consensus on vaccination in pwMS proposes the best vaccination strategy according to current evidence and expert knowledge, with the goal of homogenizing the immunization practices in pwMS.
Topics: Aged; Child; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Consensus; Evidence-Based Medicine; Immunization; Multiple Sclerosis; Vaccination
PubMed: 37293841
DOI: 10.1177/13524585231168043 -
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness... Jul 2023To assess the relative efficacy of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) including newer therapies (ozanimod, ponesimod,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
To assess the relative efficacy of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) including newer therapies (ozanimod, ponesimod, ublituximab) using network meta-analysis (NMA). Bayesian NMAs for annualised relapse rate (ARR) and time to 3-month and 6-month confirmed disability progression (3mCDP and 6mCDP) were conducted. For each outcome, the three most efficacious treatments versus placebo were monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies: alemtuzumab, ofatumumab, and ublituximab for ARR; alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab, and ofatumumab for 3mCDP; and alemtuzumab, natalizumab, and either ocrelizumab or ofatumumab (depending on the CDP definition used for included ofatumumab trials) for 6mCDP. The most efficacious DMTs for RMS were mAb therapies. Of the newer therapies, only ublituximab ranked among the three most efficacious treatments (for ARR).
Topics: Humans; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Alemtuzumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Recurrence
PubMed: 37265062
DOI: 10.57264/cer-2023-0016 -
JAMA Neurology Nov 2023Emerging evidence suggests that progression independent of relapse activity (PIRA) is a substantial contributor to long-term disability accumulation in...
IMPORTANCE
Emerging evidence suggests that progression independent of relapse activity (PIRA) is a substantial contributor to long-term disability accumulation in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). To date, there is no uniform agreed-upon definition of PIRA, limiting the comparability of published studies.
OBJECTIVE
To summarize the current evidence about PIRA based on a systematic review, to discuss the various terminologies used in the context of PIRA, and to propose a harmonized definition for PIRA for use in clinical practice and future trials.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A literature search was conducted using the search terms multiple sclerosis, PIRA, progression independent of relapse activity, silent progression, and progression unrelated to relapses in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science, published between January 1990 and December 2022.
FINDINGS
Of 119 identified single records, 48 eligible studies were analyzed. PIRA was reported to occur in roughly 5% of all patients with RRMS per annum, causing at least 50% of all disability accrual events in typical RRMS. The proportion of PIRA vs relapse-associated worsening increased with age, longer disease duration, and, despite lower absolute event numbers, potent suppression of relapses by highly effective disease-modifying therapy. However, different studies used various definitions of PIRA, rendering the comparability of studies difficult.
CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE
PIRA is the most frequent manifestation of disability accumulation across the full spectrum of traditional MS phenotypes, including clinically isolated syndrome and early RRMS. The harmonized definition suggested here may improve the comparability of results in current and future cohorts and data sets.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Chronic Disease; Recurrence; PubMed; Disease Progression
PubMed: 37782515
DOI: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2023.3331 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2023Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease of the central nervous system that affects mainly young adults (two to three times more frequently in women than in men) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease of the central nervous system that affects mainly young adults (two to three times more frequently in women than in men) and causes significant disability after onset. Although it is accepted that immunotherapies for people with MS decrease disease activity, uncertainty regarding their relative safety remains.
OBJECTIVES
To compare adverse effects of immunotherapies for people with MS or clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), and to rank these treatments according to their relative risks of adverse effects through network meta-analyses (NMAs).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, two other databases and trials registers up to March 2022, together with reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included participants 18 years of age or older with a diagnosis of MS or CIS, according to any accepted diagnostic criteria, who were included in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined one or more of the agents used in MS or CIS, and compared them versus placebo or another active agent. We excluded RCTs in which a drug regimen was compared with a different regimen of the same drug without another active agent or placebo as a control arm.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods for data extraction and pairwise meta-analyses. For NMAs, we used the netmeta suite of commands in R to fit random-effects NMAs assuming a common between-study variance. We used the CINeMA platform to GRADE the certainty of the body of evidence in NMAs. We considered a relative risk (RR) of 1.5 as a non-inferiority safety threshold compared to placebo. We assessed the certainty of evidence for primary outcomes within the NMA according to GRADE, as very low, low, moderate or high.
MAIN RESULTS
This NMA included 123 trials with 57,682 participants Serious adverse events (SAEs) Reporting of SAEs was available from 84 studies including 5696 (11%) events in 51,833 (89.9%) participants out of 57,682 participants in all studies. Based on the absolute frequency of SAEs, our non-inferiority threshold (up to a 50% increased risk) meant that no more than 1 in 18 additional people would have a SAE compared to placebo. Low-certainty evidence suggested that three drugs may decrease SAEs compared to placebo (relative risk [RR], 95% confidence interval [CI]): interferon beta-1a (Avonex) (0.78, 0.66 to 0.94); dimethyl fumarate (0.79, 0.67 to 0.93), and glatiramer acetate (0.84, 0.72 to 0.98). Several drugs met our non-inferiority criterion versus placebo: moderate-certainty evidence for teriflunomide (1.08, 0.88 to 1.31); low-certainty evidence for ocrelizumab (0.85, 0.67 to 1.07), ozanimod (0.88, 0.59 to 1.33), interferon beta-1b (0.94, 0.78 to 1.12), interferon beta-1a (Rebif) (0.96, 0.80 to 1.15), natalizumab (0.97, 0.79 to 1.19), fingolimod (1.05, 0.92 to 1.20) and laquinimod (1.06, 0.83 to 1.34); very low-certainty evidence for daclizumab (0.83, 0.68 to 1.02). Non-inferiority with placebo was not met due to imprecision for the other drugs: low-certainty evidence for cladribine (1.10, 0.79 to 1.52), siponimod (1.20, 0.95 to 1.51), ofatumumab (1.26, 0.88 to 1.79) and rituximab (1.01, 0.67 to 1.52); very low-certainty evidence for immunoglobulins (1.05, 0.33 to 3.32), diroximel fumarate (1.05, 0.23 to 4.69), peg-interferon beta-1a (1.07, 0.66 to 1.74), alemtuzumab (1.16, 0.85 to 1.60), interferons (1.62, 0.21 to 12.72) and azathioprine (3.62, 0.76 to 17.19). Withdrawals due to adverse events Reporting of withdrawals due to AEs was available from 105 studies (85.4%) including 3537 (6.39%) events in 55,320 (95.9%) patients out of 57,682 patients in all studies. Based on the absolute frequency of withdrawals, our non-inferiority threshold (up to a 50% increased risk) meant that no more than 1 in 31 additional people would withdraw compared to placebo. No drug reduced withdrawals due to adverse events when compared with placebo. There was very low-certainty evidence (meaning that estimates are not reliable) that two drugs met our non-inferiority criterion versus placebo, assuming an upper 95% CI RR limit of 1.5: diroximel fumarate (0.38, 0.11 to 1.27) and alemtuzumab (0.63, 0.33 to 1.19). Non-inferiority with placebo was not met due to imprecision for the following drugs: low-certainty evidence for ofatumumab (1.50, 0.87 to 2.59); very low-certainty evidence for methotrexate (0.94, 0.02 to 46.70), corticosteroids (1.05, 0.16 to 7.14), ozanimod (1.06, 0.58 to 1.93), natalizumab (1.20, 0.77 to 1.85), ocrelizumab (1.32, 0.81 to 2.14), dimethyl fumarate (1.34, 0.96 to 1.86), siponimod (1.63, 0.96 to 2.79), rituximab (1.63, 0.53 to 5.00), cladribine (1.80, 0.89 to 3.62), mitoxantrone (2.11, 0.50 to 8.87), interferons (3.47, 0.95 to 12.72), and cyclophosphamide (3.86, 0.45 to 33.50). Eleven drugs may have increased withdrawals due to adverse events compared with placebo: low-certainty evidence for teriflunomide (1.37, 1.01 to 1.85), glatiramer acetate (1.76, 1.36 to 2.26), fingolimod (1.79, 1.40 to 2.28), interferon beta-1a (Rebif) (2.15, 1.58 to 2.93), daclizumab (2.19, 1.31 to 3.65) and interferon beta-1b (2.59, 1.87 to 3.77); very low-certainty evidence for laquinimod (1.42, 1.01 to 2.00), interferon beta-1a (Avonex) (1.54, 1.13 to 2.10), immunoglobulins (1.87, 1.01 to 3.45), peg-interferon beta-1a (3.46, 1.44 to 8.33) and azathioprine (6.95, 2.57 to 18.78); however, very low-certainty evidence is unreliable. Sensitivity analyses including only studies with low attrition bias, drug dose above the group median, or only patients with relapsing remitting MS or CIS, and subgroup analyses by prior disease-modifying treatments did not change these figures. Rankings No drug yielded consistent P scores in the upper quartile of the probability of being better than others for primary and secondary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found mostly low and very low-certainty evidence that drugs used to treat MS may not increase SAEs, but may increase withdrawals compared with placebo. The results suggest that there is no important difference in the occurrence of SAEs between first- and second-line drugs and between oral, injectable, or infused drugs, compared with placebo. Our review, along with other work in the literature, confirms poor-quality reporting of adverse events from RCTs of interventions. At the least, future studies should follow the CONSORT recommendations about reporting harm-related issues. To address adverse effects, future systematic reviews should also include non-randomized studies.
Topics: Male; Female; Young Adult; Humans; Adolescent; Adult; Interferon beta-1a; Immunosuppressive Agents; Glatiramer Acetate; Network Meta-Analysis; Cladribine; Natalizumab; Interferon beta-1b; Alemtuzumab; Dimethyl Fumarate; Daclizumab; Azathioprine; Rituximab; Fingolimod Hydrochloride; Multiple Sclerosis; Immunotherapy
PubMed: 38032059
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012186.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2024Different therapeutic strategies are available for the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), including immunomodulators,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
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.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Glatiramer Acetate; Interferon beta-1a; Fingolimod Hydrochloride; Natalizumab; Interferon beta-1b; Cladribine; Alemtuzumab; Dimethyl Fumarate; Daclizumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Immunologic Factors; Recurrence
PubMed: 38174776
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011381.pub3 -
Outcome in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Muscle & Nerve Oct 2023Outcomes in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) have been reported in longitudinal and cross-sectional studies. A considerable variation in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION/AIMS
Outcomes in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) have been reported in longitudinal and cross-sectional studies. A considerable variation in long-term disease outcome has appeared in those reports. To overcome this uncertainty, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted on CIDP outcomes, including the parameters of case fatality rate, ambulation, physical ability, and remission.
METHODS
In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed and EMBASE (OVID) for reports with at least 2 years of follow-up on patients with active or previously active CIDP that were published no later than May 12, 2022. Studies were appraised for quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for studies reporting prevalence data. Pooled analyses were conducted and the results were visualized using forest plots. The study protocol was registered prospectively on PROSPERO (CRD42021266903).
RESULTS
A total of 1290 titles were identified. Sixty-nine full-text articles were screened and 21 studies with 1199 patients were selected for the data analysis. The pooled case fatality rate was 3.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9% to 5.7%). The pooled fraction of nonambulatory patients was 8.2% (95% CI, 5.7% to 11.6%) and, overall, 47.1% (95% CI, 39.5% to 54.9%) of CIDP patients had a good outcome without disability. The pooled rate of remission was 40.8% (95% CI, 30.6% to 51.8%).
DISCUSSION
Future research is warranted on how to prevent long-term impairment in CIDP. Care should be taken in developing clinical strategies to avoid immunomodulating therapy in the many patients in remission.
Topics: Humans; Polyradiculoneuropathy, Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating; Cross-Sectional Studies; Prevalence
PubMed: 36928889
DOI: 10.1002/mus.27820 -
European Journal of Neurology Oct 2023Differentiating neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) from its mimics is crucial to avoid misdiagnosis, especially in the absence of aquaporin-4-IgG. While... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Differentiating neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) from its mimics is crucial to avoid misdiagnosis, especially in the absence of aquaporin-4-IgG. While multiple sclerosis (MS) and myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein-IgG associated disease (MOGAD) represent major and well-defined differential diagnoses, non-demyelinating NMOSD mimics remain poorly characterized.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review on PubMed/MEDLINE to identify reports of patients with non-demyelinating disorders that mimicked or were misdiagnosed as NMOSD. Three novel cases seen at the authors' institutions were also included. The characteristics of NMOSD mimics were analyzed and red flags associated with misdiagnosis identified.
RESULTS
A total of 68 patients were included; 35 (52%) were female. Median age at symptoms onset was 44 (range, 1-78) years. Fifty-six (82%) patients did not fulfil the 2015 NMOSD diagnostic criteria. The clinical syndromes misinterpreted for NMOSD were myelopathy (41%), myelopathy + optic neuropathy (41%), optic neuropathy (6%), or other (12%). Alternative etiologies included genetic/metabolic disorders, neoplasms, infections, vascular disorders, spondylosis, and other immune-mediated disorders. Common red flags associated with misdiagnosis were lack of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pleocytosis (57%), lack of response to immunotherapy (55%), progressive disease course (54%), and lack of magnetic resonance imaging gadolinium enhancement (31%). Aquaporin-4-IgG positivity was detected in five patients by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (n = 2), cell-based assay (n = 2: serum, 1; CSF, 1), and non-specified assay (n = 1).
CONCLUSIONS
The spectrum of NMOSD mimics is broad. Misdiagnosis frequently results from incorrect application of diagnostic criteria, in patients with multiple identifiable red flags. False aquaporin-4-IgG positivity, generally from nonspecific testing assays, may rarely contribute to misdiagnosis.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Neuromyelitis Optica; Contrast Media; Myelin-Oligodendrocyte Glycoprotein; Autoantibodies; Gadolinium; Aquaporin 4; Spinal Cord Diseases; Immunoglobulin G
PubMed: 37433584
DOI: 10.1111/ene.15983 -
Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders May 2024To compare the efficacy of treatment of optic neuritis (ON) with corticosteroids (CTC) alone, CTC+plasmapheresis (PLP), and CTC+intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Efficacy and comparison of corticosteroids only and corticosteroids with plasmapheresis or intravenous immunoglobulin for the treatment of optic neuritis in demyelinating disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
To compare the efficacy of treatment of optic neuritis (ON) with corticosteroids (CTC) alone, CTC+plasmapheresis (PLP), and CTC+intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG).
DESIGN
After an episode of ON, although visual recovery is usually good, some patients may have significant visual sequelae. While the efficacy of first-line CTC is now indisputable, there is no consensus on the nature of second-line treatment. To date, no systematic review has compared the efficacy of treatment of ON with CTC alone, CTC+plasmapheresis (PLP), and CTC+intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). A meta-analysis is needed to compare the efficacy of PLP and IVIG in steroid-resistant ON.
METHODS
This systematic review included all studies comparing at least two of the three treatments for steroid-resistant ON (CTC alone, CTC+PLP, and CTC+IVIG). From all articles published on PubMed between January 2000 and June 2022, two independent ophthalmologists selected studies of interest using the PRISMA method. Methodology, patient characteristics, and outcomes were identified. A network metaanalysis was then performed to compare the efficacy of the three treatments.
RESULTS
Six comparative studies were included, representing 209 patients. The percentage of significant visual recovery after CTC alone, CTC+PLP, and CTC+IVIG in the acute treatment of steroid-resistant ON was 30 %, 45 %, and 77 %, respectively. Comparison of CTC+IVIG vs CTC alone, CTC+PLP vs CTC only, and CTC+PLP vs CTC+IVIG yielded odds ratios of 12.81, 2.47, and 0.19 respectively.
CONCLUSION
Treatment of steroid-resistant ON with CTC+PLP or CTC+IVIG is more effective than treatment with CTC alone. Although no study has directly compared the two treatments, IVIG may be more effective than PLP.
Topics: Optic Neuritis; Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Plasmapheresis; Network Meta-Analysis; Combined Modality Therapy; Immunologic Factors; Demyelinating Diseases
PubMed: 38457882
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2024.105521 -
Journal of the Peripheral Nervous... Jun 2024Advances in the understanding of cytokines have revolutionized mechanistic treatments for chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, as exemplified by rheumatoid...
Advances in the understanding of cytokines have revolutionized mechanistic treatments for chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, as exemplified by rheumatoid arthritis. We conducted a systematic literature review on the role of cytokines and chemokines in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN). Ovid Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched until August 31, 2022 for human studies investigating cytokines levels in CIDP or MMN. Fifty-five articles on 1061 CIDP patients and 86 MMN patients were included, with a median of 18 patients per study (range 3-71). Studies differed in the inclusion criteria, type of assay, manufacturer, control subjects, and tested biological material. Only a minority of studies reported data on disease activity. Interleukin (IL)-6, IL-17, CXCL10, and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), were elevated in CIDP compared to controls in most of the studies. IL-6 and TNF-α levels are also correlated with disability. In MMN patients, IL-1Ra was elevated in the majority of the reports. While acknowledging the challenges in comparing studies and the various limitations of the studies, including small patient numbers, particularly in MMN, our review suggests that IL-6, IL-17, CXCL10, and TNF-α might play a role in CIDP pathogenesis. Larger studies are needed in MMN.
Topics: Humans; Chemokines; Cytokines; Polyneuropathies; Polyradiculoneuropathy, Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating
PubMed: 38600685
DOI: 10.1111/jns.12622 -
Neurological Sciences : Official... Sep 2023Previously, several studies investigated the effect of cladribine among patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) as a treatment option. Due to the contradictory results of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Previously, several studies investigated the effect of cladribine among patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) as a treatment option. Due to the contradictory results of previous studies regarding the efficacy and safety of cladribine in the MS population, we aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis by including clinical trials and observational studies in terms of having more confirmative results to make a general decision.
METHODS
The three databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were comprehensively searched in May 2022. We included the studies that investigated the efficacy and safety of cladribine in patients with MS. Eligible studies have to provide sufficient details on MS diagnosis and appropriate follow-up duration. We investigated the efficacy of cladribine with several outcomes including Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) change, progression-free survival (PFS), relapse-free survival (RFS), and MRI-free activity survival (MFAS).
RESULTS
After two-step reviewing, 23 studies were included in our qualitative and quantitative synthesis. The pooled SMD for EDSS before and after treatment was - 0.54 (95%CI: - 1.46, 0.39). Our analysis showed that the PFS after cladribine use is 79% (95%CI 71%, 86%). Also, 58% of patients with MS who received cladribine remained relapse-free (95%CI 31%, 83%). Furthermore, the MFAS after treatment was 60% (95%CI 36%, 81%). Our analysis showed that infection is the most common adverse event after cladribine treatment with a pooled prevalence of 10% (95%CI 4%, 18%). Moreover, the pooled prevalence of infusion-related adverse events was 9% (95%CI 4%, 15%). Also, the malignancies after cladribine were present in 0.4% of patients (95%CI 0.25%, 0.75%).
CONCLUSION
Our results showed acceptable safety and efficacy for cladribine for the treatment of MS except in terms of reducing EDSS. Combination of our findings with the results of previous studies which compared cladribine to other disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), cladribine seems to be a safe and effective drug in achieving better treatment for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) patients.
Topics: Humans; Cladribine; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Clinical Trials as Topic; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37062787
DOI: 10.1007/s10072-023-06794-w