-
Drug Safety Apr 2024Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) was first described among patients affected by hematological or solid tumors. Following the human immunodeficiency virus... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) was first described among patients affected by hematological or solid tumors. Following the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic, people living with HIV have represented most cases for more than a decade. With the diffusion of highly active antiretroviral therapy, this group progressively decreased in favor of patients undergoing treatment with targeted therapy/immunomodulators. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the objective was to assess which drugs are most frequently related to PML development, and report the incidence of drug-induced PML through a meta-analytic approach.
METHODS
The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Web of Science and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health Database (CADTH) were searched up to May 10, 2022. Articles that reported the risk of PML development after treatment with immunomodulatory drugs, including patients of both sexes under the age of 80 years, affected by any pathology except HIV, primary immunodeficiencies or malignancies, were included in the review. The incidence of drug-induced PML was calculated based on PML cases and total number of patients observed per 100 persons and the observation time. Random-effect metanalyses were conducted for each drug reporting pooled incidence with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and median (interquartile range [IQR]) of the observation time. Heterogeneity was measured by I statistics. Publication bias was examined through funnel plots and Egger's test.
RESULTS
A total of 103 studies were included in the systematic review. In our analysis, we found no includible study reporting cases of PML during the course of treatment with ocrelizumab, vedolizumab, abrilumab, ontamalimab, teriflunomide, daclizumab, inebilizumab, basiliximab, tacrolimus, belimumab, infliximab, firategrast, disulone, azathioprine or danazole. Dalfampridine, glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate and fingolimod show a relatively safe profile, although some cases of PML have been reported. The meta-analysis showed an incidence of PML cases among patients undergoing rituximab treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) of 0.01 cases/100 persons (95% CI - 0.08 to 0.09; I = 20.4%; p = 0.25) for a median observation period of 23.5 months (IQR 22.1-42.1). Treatment of MS with natalizumab carried a PML risk of 0.33 cases/100 persons (95% CI 0.29-0.37; I = 50%; p = 0.003) for a median observation period of 44.1 months (IQR 28.4-60) and a mean number of doses of 36.3 (standard deviation [SD] ± 20.7). When comparing data about patients treated with standard interval dosing (SID) and extended interval dosing (EID), the latter appears to carry a smaller risk of PML, that is, 0.08 cases/100 persons (95% CI 0.0-0.15) for EID versus 0.3 cases/100 persons (95% CI 0.25-0.34) for SID.
CONCLUSIONS
A higher risk of drug-related PML in patients whose immune system is not additionally depressed by means of neoplasms, HIV or concomitant medications is found in the neurological field. This risk is higher in MS treatment, and specifically during long-term natalizumab therapy. While this drug is still routinely prescribed in this field, considering the efficacy in reducing MS relapses, in other areas it could play a smaller role, and be gradually replaced by other safer and more recently approved agents.
Topics: Male; Female; Humans; Aged, 80 and over; Natalizumab; Leukoencephalopathy, Progressive Multifocal; Canada; Immunologic Factors; Multiple Sclerosis; HIV Infections
PubMed: 38321317
DOI: 10.1007/s40264-023-01383-4 -
Therapeutic Advances in Neurological... 2021Pregnancy is widely accepted as a period when relapses of multiple sclerosis (MS) are decreased, with an increased risk of relapse in the first months postpartum. This... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Pregnancy is widely accepted as a period when relapses of multiple sclerosis (MS) are decreased, with an increased risk of relapse in the first months postpartum. This systematic review evaluated relapses during pregnancy and postpartum, according to disease-modifying therapy (DMT) exposure before, during, and after pregnancy, and the influence of DMT on these outcomes.
METHODS
We searched Medline and EMBASE to identify relevant publications from November 2009 to 2019 along with references lists of selected articles. Publications were filtered and assessed by two independent reviewers to ensure appropriate data extraction.
RESULTS
Of 469 articles identified, 28 were included for analysis including 4739 pregnancies in 5324 patients. All five studies comparing natalizumab or fingolimod (high-efficacy DMTs) use preconception versus interferon beta, glatiramer acetate, or dimethyl fumarate, or no DMT suggested that there was a greater risk of relapse during pregnancy following withdrawal of the high-efficacy DMTs. Of 10 studies evaluating relapses during pregnancy, five studies found that continuing DMTs into early pregnancy reduced relapses compared to discontinuing treatment. DMT exposure preconception generally had no effect on postpartum relapses versus no DMT; however, natalizumab or fingolimod use preconception was associated with postpartum relapse versus no high-efficacy DMT in one study. DMT exposure during pregnancy was associated with fewer postpartum relapses versus no DMT exposure in four of seven studies, while three found no difference between groups.
CONCLUSION
Results of this systematic review concerning women with relapsing MS show a complex and often conflicting picture regarding DMT exposure and relapses during and after pregnancy. Although our data are limited by variability between studies, there is some evidence suggesting the use of natalizumab or fingolimod preconception is associated with increased risk of relapses during pregnancy, highlighting the need for effective disease-management strategies in these especially high-risk patients.
PubMed: 34876925
DOI: 10.1177/17562864211051012 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2013Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic immune-mediated, inflammatory, demyelinating, neurodegenerative disorder of the central nervous system, and it causes major... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic immune-mediated, inflammatory, demyelinating, neurodegenerative disorder of the central nervous system, and it causes major socioeconomic burden for the individual patient and for society. An inflammatory pathology occurs during the early relapsing stage of MS and a neurodegenerative pathology dominates the later progressive stage of the disease. Not all MS patients respond adequately to currently available disease-modifying drugs (DMDs). Alternative MS treatments with new modes of action are required to expand the current options for disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) and to aim for freedom from relapses, inflammatory lesions, disability progression and neurodegeneration. Laquinimod has dual properties of immunomodulation and neuroprotection and is a potentially promising new oral DMD in the treatment of relapsing MS.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety profile of laquinimod as monotherapy or combination therapy versus placebo or approved DMDs (interferon-β, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate) for modifying the disease course in patients with MS.
SEARCH METHODS
The Review Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Group Specialised Register which, among other sources, contains trials from CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, PEDro and Clinical trials registries (29 April 2013). We checked references in identified trials and manually searched the reports (2004 to March 2013) from neurological associations and MS societies. We also communicated with researchers participating in trials on laquinimod and contacted Teva Pharmaceutical Industries.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised, double-blind, controlled, parallel group clinical trials (RCTs) with a length of follow-up of at least one year evaluating laquinimod, as monotherapy or combination therapy, versus placebo or approved DMDs for patients with MS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Disagreements were discussed and resolved by consensus among review authors. Principal investigators of included studies were contacted for additional data or confirmation of information.
MAIN RESULTS
Only one study met our inclusion criteria, involving 1106 adult patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) and an entry Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of ≤ 5.5 and an entry disease duration of ≥ 6 months. Five hundred and fifty patients treated with laquinimod at a dose of 0.6 mg orally administered once daily in a capsule were compared with 556 patients treated with a matching placebo capsule. The study had a high risk for attrition bias (21.9%). Laquinimod had potential benefits in reducing relapse rates and was safe for most patients with RRMS in the short term. The most common adverse events included headache, back pain, arthralgia, diarrhoea, cough, urinary tract infection, elevated alanine aminotransferase, insomnia, nausea, abdominal pain and sinusitis. One ongoing trial was identified.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found low-level evidence for the use of laquinimod as a disease-modifying therapy for MS because only one study with limited quality (high risk of attrition bias) was included. The published study suggests that laquinimod at a dose of 0.6 mg orally administered once daily may be safe and have potential benefits for most patients with RRMS in the short term. We are waiting for the publication of ongoing trials.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Quinolones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Secondary Prevention
PubMed: 23922214
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010475.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Multiple 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... (Review)
Review
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.
Topics: Fingolimod Hydrochloride; Glatiramer Acetate; Humans; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Progressive; Rituximab; Young Adult
PubMed: 34748215
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013874.pub2 -
CNS Drugs Oct 2016This study aimed to test the number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) and to harm (NNTH), and the likelihood to be helped or harmed (LHH) when assessing benefits, risks,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Benefit-Risk of Therapies for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: Testing the Number Needed to Treat to Benefit (NNTB), Number Needed to Treat to Harm (NNTH) and the Likelihood to be Helped or Harmed (LHH): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to test the number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) and to harm (NNTH), and the likelihood to be helped or harmed (LHH) when assessing benefits, risks, and benefit-risk ratios of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) approved for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).
METHODS
In May 2016, we conducted a systematic review using the PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify phase III, randomized controlled trials with a duration of ≥2 years that assessed first-line (dimethyl fumarate [DMF], glatiramer acetate [GA], β-interferons [IFN], and teriflunomide) or second-line (alemtuzumab, fingolimod, and natalizumab) DMTs in patients with RRMS. Meta-analyses were performed to estimate relative risks (RRs) on annualized relapse rate (ARR), proportion of relapse-free patients (PPR-F), disability progression (PP-F-CDPS3M), and safety outcomes. NNTB and NNTH values were calculated applying RRs to control event rates. LHH was calculated as NNTH/NNTB ratio.
RESULTS
The lowest NNTBs on ARR, PPR-F, and PP-F-CDPS3M were found with IFN-β-1a-SC (NNTB 3, 95 % CI 2-4; NNTB 7, 95 % CI 4-18; NNTB 4, 95 % CI 3-7, respectively) and natalizumab (NNTB 2, 95 % CI 2-3; NNTB 4, 95 % CI 3-6; NNTB 9, 95 % CI 6-19, respectively). The lowest NNTH on adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation was found with IFN-β-1b (NNTH 14, 95 % 2-426) versus placebo; a protective effect was noted with alemtuzumab versus IFN-β-1a-SC (NNTB 22, 95 % 17-41). LHHs >1 were more frequent with IFN-β-1a-SC and natalizumab.
CONCLUSIONS
These metrics may be valuable for benefit-risk assessments, as they reflect baseline risks and are easily interpreted. Before making treatment decisions, clinicians must acknowledge that a higher RR reduction with drug A as compared with drug B (versus a common comparator in trial A and trial B, respectively) does not necessarily mean that the number of patients needed to be treated for one patient to encounter one aditional outcome of interest over a defined period of time is lower with drug A than with drug B. Overall, IFN-β-1a-SC and natalizumab seem to have the most favorable benefit-risk ratios among first- and second-line DMTs, respectively.
Topics: Humans; Immunologic Factors; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 27538416
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-016-0377-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2016This is an update of the Cochrane review "Teriflunomide for multiple sclerosis" (first published in The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12).Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is an update of the Cochrane review "Teriflunomide for multiple sclerosis" (first published in The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12).Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic immune-mediated disease of the central nervous system. It is clinically characterized by recurrent relapses or progression, or both, often leading to severe neurological disability and a serious decline in quality of life. Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for MS aim to prevent occurrence of relapses and disability progression. Teriflunomide is a pyrimidine synthesis inhibitor approved by both the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as a DMT for adults with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the absolute and comparative effectiveness and safety of teriflunomide as monotherapy or combination therapy versus placebo or other disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) (interferon beta (IFNβ), glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab) for modifying the disease course in people with MS.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group Specialised Trials Register (30 September 2015). We checked reference lists of published reviews and retrieved articles and searched reports (2004 to September 2015) from the MS societies in Europe and America. We also communicated with investigators participating in trials of teriflunomide and the pharmaceutical company, Sanofi-Aventis.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized, controlled, parallel-group clinical trials with a length of follow-up of one year or greater evaluating teriflunomide, as monotherapy or combination therapy, versus placebo or other approved DMDs for people with MS without restrictions regarding dose, administration frequency and duration of treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures of Cochrane. Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Disagreements were discussed and resolved by consensus among the review authors. We contacted the principal investigators of included studies for additional data or confirmation of data.
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies involving 3231 people evaluated the efficacy and safety of teriflunomide 7 mg and 14 mg, alone or with add-on IFNβ, versus placebo or IFNβ-1a for adults with relapsing forms of MS and an entry Expanded Disability Status Scale score of less than 5.5.Overall, there were obvious clinical heterogeneities due to diversities in study designs or interventions and methodological heterogeneities across studies. All studies had a high risk of detection bias for relapse assessment and a high risk of bias due to conflicts of interest. Among them, three studies additionally had a high risk of attrition bias due to a high dropout rate and two studies had an unclear risk of attrition bias. The studies of combination therapy with IFNβ (650 participants) and the study with IFNβ-1a as controls (324 participants) also had a high risk for performance bias and a lack of power due to the limited sample.Two studies evaluated the benefit and the safety of teriflunomide as monotherapy versus placebo over a period of one year (1169 participants) or two years (1088 participants). A meta-analysis was not conducted. Compared to placebo, administration of teriflunomide at a dose of 7 mg/day or 14 mg/day as monotherapy reduced the number of participants with at least one relapse over one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.87, P value = 0.001 with 7 mg/day and RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.75, P value < 0.00001 with 14 mg/day) or two years (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.98, P value = 0.03 with 7 mg/day and RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93, P value = 0.004 with 14 days). Only teriflunomide at a dose of 14 mg/day reduced the number of participants with disability progression over one year (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.84, P value = 0.006) or two years (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96, P value = 0.02). When taking the effect of drop-outs into consideration, the likely-case scenario analyses still showed a benefit in reducing the number of participants with at least one relapse, but not for the number of participants with disability progression. Both doses also reduced the annualized relapse rate and the number of gadolinium-enhancing T1-weighted lesions over two years. Quality of evidence for relapse outcomes at one year or at two years was low, while for disability progression at one year or at two years was very low.When compared to IFNβ-1a, teriflunomide at a dose of 14 mg/day had a similar efficacy to IFNβ-1a in reducing the proportion of participants with at least one relapse over one year, while teriflunomide at a dose of 7 mg/day was inferior to IFNβ-1a (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.67, P value = 0.14; 215 participants with 14 mg/day and RR 2.74, 95% CI 1.66 to 4.53, P value < 0.0001; 213 participants with 7 mg/day). However, the quality of evidence was very low.In terms of safety profile, the most common adverse events associated with teriflunomide were diarrhoea, nausea, hair thinning, elevated alanine aminotransferase, neutropenia and lymphopenia. These adverse events had a dose-related effects and rarely led to treatment discontinuation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There was low-quality evidence to support that teriflunomide at a dose of 7 mg/day or 14 mg/day as monotherapy reduces both the number of participants with at least one relapse and the annualized relapse rate over one year or two years of treatment in comparison with placebo. Only teriflunomide at a dose of 14 mg/day reduced the number of participants with disability progression and delayed the progression of disability over one year or two years, but the quality of the evidence was very low. The quality of available data was too low to evaluate the benefit teriflunomide as monotherapy versus IFNβ-1a or as combination therapy with IFNβ. The common adverse effects were diarrhoea, nausea, hair thinning, elevated alanine aminotransferase, neutropenia and lymphopenia. These adverse effects were mostly mild-to-moderate in severity, but had a dose-related effect. New studies of high quality and longer follow-up are needed to evaluate the comparative benefit of teriflunomide on these outcomes and the safety in comparison with other DMTs.
Topics: Adult; Crotonates; Humans; Hydroxybutyrates; Immunologic Factors; Immunosuppressive Agents; Interferon-beta; Middle Aged; Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Progressive; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Nitriles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Toluidines; Young Adult
PubMed: 27003123
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009882.pub3 -
Immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review/meta-analysis.Annals of Clinical and Translational... Aug 2022Responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with MS (pwMS) varies by disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). We perform a meta-analysis and systematic review of immune... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with MS (pwMS) varies by disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). We perform a meta-analysis and systematic review of immune response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in pwMS.
METHODS
Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase from January 1, 2019-December 31, 2021, excluding prior SARS-CoV-2 infections. The meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines were applied. The data were pooled using a fixed-effects model.
RESULTS
Eight-hundred sixty-four healthy controls and 2203 pwMS from 31 studies were included. Antibodies were detected in 93% healthy controls (HCs), and 77% pwMS, with >93% responses in all DMTs (interferon-beta, glatiramer acetate, cladribine, natalizumab, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab, and teriflunomide) except for 72% sphingosine-1-phosphate modulators (S1PM) and 44% anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). T-cell responses were detected in most anti-CD20 and decreased in S1PM. Higher antibody response was observed in mRNA vaccines (99.7% HCs) versus non-mRNA vaccines (HCs: 72% inactivated virus; pwMS: 86% vector, 59% inactivated virus). A multivariate logistic regression model to predict vaccine response demonstrated that mRNA versus non-mRNA vaccines had a 3.4 odds ratio (OR) for developing immunity in anti-CD20 (p = 0.0052) and 7.9 OR in pwMS on S1PM or CD20 mAbs (p < 0.0001). Antibody testing timing did not affect antibody detection.
CONCLUSION
Antibody responses are decreased in S1PM and anti-CD20; however, cellular responses were positive in most anti-CD20 with decreased T cell responses in S1PM. mRNA vaccines had increased seroconversion rates compared to non-RNA vaccines. Further investigation in how DMTs affect vaccine immunity are needed.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Humans; Immunity; Multiple Sclerosis; SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination
PubMed: 35852423
DOI: 10.1002/acn3.51628 -
Journal of Neurology Dec 2020Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune, demyelinating disease of the central nervous system. The treatment of MS has always been a focus of neurological research. To... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of disease-modifying therapies in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune, demyelinating disease of the central nervous system. The treatment of MS has always been a focus of neurological research. To date, the US Food and Drug Administration has approved 15 medications for modifying the course of multiple sclerosis. In this study, we examined the effects of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) on clinical outcomes.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DMTs in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for RCTs published up to Oct 31, 2018. The primary outcome was efficacy (relapse rate over 24 months) and acceptability (treatment discontinuation due to adverse events over 24 months).
FINDINGS
We identified 23 suitable trials encompassing 14,096 participants. During the 2 years of follow-up, all drugs were significantly more effective than were placebos. The risk ratios with 95% credible intervals were as follows: alemtuzumab, 0.49 (0.40, 0.59); ocrelizumab, 0.49 (0.40, 0.61); mitoxantrone, 0.47 (0.27, 0.80); natalizumab, 0.51 (0.43, 0.61); fingolimod, 0.57 (0.50, 0.65); peginterferon beta-1a, 0.63 (0.52, 0.77); dimethyl fumarate, 0.65 (0.56, 0.74); teriflunomide 14 mg, 0.78 (0.66, 0.92); glatiramer acetate, 0.80 (0.72, 0.89); IFN β-1a (Rebif), 0.81 (0.72, 0.90); IFN β-1b (Betaseron), 0.81 (0.72, 0.91); teriflunomide 7 mg, 0.83 (0.71, 0.98); and IFN β-1a (Avonex). 0.87 (0.77, 0.99). Risk ratios compared with placebo for discontinuation due to adverse events ranged from 1.12 for the best drug (fingolimod) to 0.10 for the worst drug (mitoxantrone); from 0.24 (alemtuzumab) to 0.89 (IFNβ-1b [Betaseron]) for sustained (3-month) disability progression; and from 0.85 (natalizumab) to 1.25 (teriflunomide 14 mg) for the number of participants with serious adverse events.
INTERPRETATION
All DMTs were superior to placebo in reducing the relapse rate during the 2 years of follow-up. As to the comparison between drugs, alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab, natalizumab and fingolimod had a relatively higher response and lower dropout rates than did the other DMTs.
Topics: Fingolimod Hydrochloride; Glatiramer Acetate; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Interferon beta-1a; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 31129710
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-019-09395-w -
Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders May 2022Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune inflammatory demyelinating disorder of the central nervous system. The clinical presentation supported by characteristic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune inflammatory demyelinating disorder of the central nervous system. The clinical presentation supported by characteristic findings on MRI forms the backbone of the current diagnostic criteria. This study was aimed to investigate the efficacy based on MRI outcomes of FDA approved disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of DMTs. The outcome measures were the mean number of T2 [new/enlarging lesions], new T1 [gadolinium-enhancing (Gd+) T1 and hypointense T1] lesions in brain MRI performed at 12 months or 24 months. We performed a network meta-analysis using the frequentist approach in STATA version 16.0.
RESULTS
We identified 26 RCTs for final analysis. Interferon β-1a and placebo were the most common comparison treatment. Ocrelizumab was more effective in reducing the number of Gd+T1 lesions. Dimethyl fumarate 480 mg was relatively better in reducing the number of new T2 lesions. The treatment ranking showed that ocrelizumab and dimethyl fumarate 480 mg were more efficacious (1 and 0.9 in SUCRA, respectively) for reducing the number of new Gd+T1/hypointense lesions; dimethyl fumarate 480 mg/720 mg and natalizumab were more efficacious (1.0, 0.9 and 0.8 in SUCRA, respectively) to reduce the number of new T2 lesions.
CONCLUSION
Ocrelizumab, dimethyl fumarate 480/720 mg and natalizumab demonstrated favourable MRI outcomes in patients with the RRMS.
Topics: Dimethyl Fumarate; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Natalizumab; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 35381534
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2022.103760 -
Multiple Sclerosis International 2022We conducted this study to assess the effect of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) on coronavirus disease (COVID-19) susceptibility and severity in people with multiple... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
We conducted this study to assess the effect of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) on coronavirus disease (COVID-19) susceptibility and severity in people with multiple sclerosis (MS).
METHODS
Available studies from PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and gray literature, including reference lists and conference abstracts, were searched from December 1, 2019, to July 26, 2021. We included cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies assessing the association of DMTs with risk of contracting COVID-19 or its outcomes in MS patients on univariate or multivariate regression analyses. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the risk of COVID-19 and developing severe infection across DMTs.
RESULTS
Out of the initial 3893 records and 1883 conference abstracts, a total of 10 studies were included. Pairwise comparisons showed that none of the DMTs meaningfully affect the risk of acquiring infection. There was significant total heterogeneity and inconsistency across this NMA. In comparison with no DMT, dimethyl fumarate (0.62 (0.42, 0.93)), fingolimod (0.55 (0.32, 0.94)), natalizumab (0.50 (0.31, 0.81)), and interferon (0.42 (0.22, 0.79)) were associated with a decreased risk of severe COVID-19; but, rituximab was observed to increase the risk (1.94 (1.20, 3.12)). Compared to rituximab or ocrelizumab, all DMTs were associated with a decreased risk. Pairwise comparisons showed no differences across other DMTs. Interferon and rituximab were associated with the lowest and highest risks of severe COVID-19.
CONCLUSION
Our study showed an increased risk of severe COVID-19 in patients on rituximab and ocrelizumab. No association with COVID-19 severity across other DMTs was observed.
PubMed: 36187599
DOI: 10.1155/2022/9388813