Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy of first-line natalizumab vs IFN-? or glatiramer acetate in relapsing MS.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We compared efficacy and treatment persistence in treatment-naive patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) initiating natalizumab compared with interferon-? (IFN-?)/glatiramer acetate (GA) therapies, using propensity score-matched cohorts from observational multiple sclerosis registries.

Methods

The study population initiated IFN-?/GA in the MSBase Registry or natalizumab in the Tysabri Observational Program, had ?3 months of on-treatment follow-up, and had active RRMS, defined as ?1 gadolinium-enhancing lesion on cerebral MRI at baseline or ?1 relapse within the 12 months prior to baseline. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were balanced between propensity-matched groups. Annualized relapse rate (ARR), time to first relapse, treatment persistence, and disability outcomes were compared between matched treatment arms in the total population (n = 366/group) and subgroups with higher baseline disease activity.

Results

First-line natalizumab was associated with a 68% relative reduction in ARR from a mean (SD) of 0.63 (0.92) on IFN-?/GA to 0.20 (0.63) (p [signed-rank] < 0.0001), a 64% reduction in the rate of first relapse (hazard ratio [HR] 0.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28-0.47; p < 0.001), and a 27% reduction in the rate of discontinuation (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.93; p = 0.01), compared with first-line IFN-?/GA therapy. Confirmed disability progression and area under the Expanded Disability Status Scale-time curve analyses were not significant. Similar relapse and treatment persistence results were observed in each of the higher disease activity subgroups.

Conclusions

This study provides Class IV evidence that first-line natalizumab for RRMS improves relapse and treatment persistence outcomes compared to first-line IFN-?/GA. This needs to be balanced against the risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in natalizumab-treated patients.

Classification of evidence

This study provides Class IV evidence that first-line natalizumab for RRMS improves relapse rates and treatment persistence outcomes compared to first-line IFN-?/GA.

SUBMITTER: Spelman T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4828679 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative efficacy of first-line natalizumab vs IFN-β or glatiramer acetate in relapsing MS.

Spelman Tim T Kalincik Tomas T Jokubaitis Vilija V Zhang Annie A Pellegrini Fabio F Wiendl Heinz H Belachew Shibeshih S Hyde Robert R Verheul Freek F Lugaresi Alessandra A Havrdová Eva E Horáková Dana D Grammond Pierre P Duquette Pierre P Prat Alexandre A Iuliano Gerardo G Terzi Murat M Izquierdo Guillermo G Hupperts Raymond M M RM Boz Cavit C Pucci Eugenio E Giuliani Giorgio G Sola Patrizia P Spitaleri Daniele L A DL Lechner-Scott Jeannette J Bergamaschi Roberto R Grand'Maison François F Granella Franco F Kappos Ludwig L Trojano Maria M Butzkueven Helmut H

Neurology. Clinical practice 20160401 2

<h4>Background</h4>We compared efficacy and treatment persistence in treatment-naive patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) initiating natalizumab compared with interferon-β (IFN-β)/glatiramer acetate (GA) therapies, using propensity score-matched cohorts from observational multiple sclerosis registries.<h4>Methods</h4>The study population initiated IFN-β/GA in the MSBase Registry or natalizumab in the Tysabri Observational Program, had ≥3 months of on-treatment follow-up, a ...[more]

PMID: 27104064

Similar Datasets

Project description:One of our new major finding among the genes that contributes to MS susceptibility is ICSBP1. The so called disease modifying therapies like interferon-beta (IFN-Î²), possibly acting on the peripheral T-cells, reduce the disease activity and the clinical progression, with a MRI-detectable effect in preventing lesion burden and cerebral atrophy development in RR-MS. It suggests a critical role of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) immune response and modulation in developing inflammation in the brain. We tested the hypothesis that the genetic effect of the susceptible allele ICSBP1 can impact the gene expression profile of molecules belonging to the interferon pathway. We therefore interrogated the PBMC for changes in gene expression profile. We correlate those changes with the minor allele frequency for ICSBP1, performing independent quantitative trait analysis for each treatment category. Expression Quantitative Trait Loci Association with a p value < 0.05 have been used in follow up analysis. The regression coefficient of the Quantitative trait association represents the degree of correlation between the gene expression for each interrogated target gene and the minor allele frequency of the SNP for our gene of interest. This coefficient has been used as input in the subsequent Gene Set Enrichment Analysis performed in a pre-ranked approach. The resulting GSEA-SNP method rests on the assumption that SNPs underlying a disease phenotype might affect genes constituting a signaling pathway or genes with a common regulation. Therefore, GSEA-SNP can facilitate the identification of pathways or of underlying biological mechanisms. We used microarrays to capture gene expression profile of untreated subjects and of subjects under disease modyfing treatment (Interferon Beta and Glatiramer Acetate), in order to correlate gene expression and genotype data and in order to identify sets of genes specifically regulated in the different treatment categories. Experiment Overall Design: Between July 2002 and October 2007, PBMC samples were collected from relapsing-remitting MS subjects and CIS subjects as part of the Comprehensive Longitudinal Investigation of MS at the Brigham & Womenâs Hospital (CLIMB study). We then selected the first time point for each subject with multiple measurements based on an at least three months of treatment criteria. We thereafter analyzed the data for each treament category.

Project description:ImportanceDoses of fingolimod lower than 0.5 mg per day were not investigated during the fingolimod clinical development program. Whether lower doses of fingolimod might retain efficacy with fewer safety risks remains unknown.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of fingolimod, 0.5 mg, and fingolimod, 0.25 mg, compared with glatiramer acetate and to assess whether these doses of fingolimod show superior efficacy to glatiramer acetate in adult patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.InterventionsFingolimod, 0.5 mg, or fingolimod, 0.25 mg, orally once per day or glatiramer acetate, 20 mg, subcutaneously once per day.Design, setting, and participantsThe Multiple Sclerosis Study Evaluating Safety and Efficacy of Two Doses of Fingolimod Versus Copaxone (ASSESS) was a phase 3b multicenter randomized rater-blinded and dose-blinded 12-month clinical trial conducted between August 9, 2012, and April 30, 2018 (including the time required to recruit participants). A total of 1461 patients aged 18 to 65 years with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis were screened, and 1064 participants were randomized. These participants had at least 1 documented relapse during the previous year or 2 documented relapses during the previous 2 years and an Expanded Disability Status Scale score of 0 to 6 at screening. Data were analyzed between September and November 2018.Main outcomes and measuresThe superiority of the fingolimod doses was tested hierarchically, with fingolimod, 0.5 mg, vs glatiramer acetate, 20 mg, tested first, followed by fingolimod, 0.25 mg, vs glatiramer acetate, 20 mg. The primary end point was the reduction in annualized relapse rate (ARR). Magnetic resonance imaging parameters, safety, and tolerability were also assessed.ResultsOf 1461 adult patients screened, 1064 participants (72.8%) were randomized (mean [SD] age, 39.6 [11.0] years; 792 women [74.4%]) to 3 treatment groups: 352 participants received fingolimod, 0.5 mg, 370 participants received fingolimod, 0.25 mg, and 342 participants received glatiramer acetate, 20 mg. In total, 859 participants (80.7%) completed the study. Treatment with fingolimod, 0.5 mg, was superior to treatment with glatiramer acetate, 20 mg, in reducing ARR (40.7% relative reduction); the relative reduction with fingolimod, 0.25 mg, was 14.6%, which was not statistically significant (for fingolimod, 0.5 mg, ARR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.11-0.21; for fingolimod, 0.25 mg, ARR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.17-0.29; for glatiramer acetate, 20 mg, ARR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.20-0.34). Treatment with both fingolimod doses (0.5 mg and 0.25 mg) significantly reduced new or newly enlarging T2 and gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions compared with treatment with glatiramer acetate. Adverse events were reported in similar proportions across treatment groups (312 participants [90.4%] in the fingolimod, 0.5 mg, group, 323 participants [88.3%] in the fingolimod, 0.25 mg, group, and 283 participants [87.3%] in the glatiramer acetate group).Conclusions and relevanceFingolimod, 0.5 mg, demonstrated superior clinical efficacy compared with glatiramer acetate, 20 mg, and had a superior benefit-risk profile compared with fingolimod, 0.25 mg, in adult participants with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01633112.

Project description:BACKGROUND:We systematically reviewed the comparative effectiveness of injectable beta-interferons (IFN-?) and glatiramer acetate (GA) on annualised relapse rate (ARR), progression and discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) in RRMS, using evidence from within the drugs' recommended dosages. METHODS:We updated prior comprehensive reviews, checked references of included studies, contacted experts in the field, and screened websites for relevant publications to locate randomised trials of IFN-? and GA with recommended dosages in RRMS populations, compared against placebo or other recommended dosages. Abstracts were screened and assessed for inclusion in duplicate and independently. Studies were appraised using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Rate ratios for ARR, hazard ratios for time to progression, and risk ratios for discontinuation due to AEs were synthesised in separate models using random effects network meta-analysis. RESULTS:We identified 24 studies reported in 42 publications. Most studies were at high risk of bias in at least one domain. All drugs had a beneficial effect on ARR as compared to placebo, but not compared to each other, and findings were robust to sensitivity analysis. We considered time to progression confirmed at 3 months and confirmed at 6 months in separate models; while both models suggested that the included drugs were effective, findings were not consistent between models. Discontinuation due to AEs did not appear to be different between drugs. CONCLUSIONS:Meta-analyses confirmed that IFN-? and GA reduce ARR and generally delay progression as defined in these trials, though there was no clear 'winner' across outcomes. Findings are additionally tempered by the high risk of bias across studies, and the use of an impairment/mobility scale to measure disease progression. Future research should consider more relevant measures of disability and, given that most trials have been short-term, consider a longitudinal approach to comparative effectiveness. REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42016043278 .