Dataset Information

Rituximab versus mitoxantrone: comparing effectiveness and safety in advanced relapsing multiple sclerosis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Rituximab (RTX), a CD20 depleting agent, is a frequently used off-label treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS), while mitoxantrone (MTX) is approved, albeit rarely used for active relapsing MS (RMS). However, observational data comparing RTX and MTX effectiveness and safety are scarce.

Objective

We aimed to compare effectiveness and safety of MTX and RTX in patients with active RMS.

Methods

From combined retrospective clinical data of three MS centers, we selected patients who had received at least one infusion of RTX or MTX and had at least a 6-month clinical follow-up available. Treatment groups were compared by propensity score (PS)-adjusted regression and inverse PS-weighted generalized estimated equation models regarding disability progression, relapse activity, and adverse events (AEs).

Results

We included 292 RMS patients (mean age 41.8 years, 71.6% female) who received RTX (119 patients, mean age 36.8 years, 74.8% female) or MTX (173 patients mean age 45.3 years, 69.4% female). Using both PS methods, we did not find a significant effect favoring RTX or MTX treatment regarding the probability of disability worsening or relapse occurrence. However, RTX treatment was associated with a significantly lower probability of severe AEs and AEs.

Conclusions

RTX shows comparable effectiveness but a favorable safety profile compared with MTX in active RMS.

SUBMITTER: Zrzavy T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8323410 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Rituximab <i>versus</i> mitoxantrone: comparing effectiveness and safety in advanced relapsing multiple sclerosis.

Zrzavy Tobias T Daniels Esther E Stuka Niklas N Weber Dennis D Winkelmann Alexander A Rauschka Helmut H Hecker Michael M Aboulenein-Djamshidian Fahmy F Meister Stefanie S Leutmezer Fritz F Berger Thomas T Bsteh Gabriel G Zettl Uwe Klaus UK Rommer Paulus P

Therapeutic advances in chronic disease 20210728

<h4>Background</h4>Rituximab (RTX), a CD20 depleting agent, is a frequently used off-label treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS), while mitoxantrone (MTX) is approved, albeit rarely used for active relapsing MS (RMS). However, observational data comparing RTX and MTX effectiveness and safety are scarce.<h4>Objective</h4>We aimed to compare effectiveness and safety of MTX and RTX in patients with active RMS.<h4>Methods</h4>From combined retrospective clinical data of three MS centers, we selected ...[more]

PMID: 34377385

Similar Datasets

Project description:Fingolimod approval was based mainly on two clinical trials, FREEDOMS and TRANSFORMS, which demonstrated the efficacy and safety of fingolimod in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). We present an observational study that validates these trials findings in a real-world setting, whereby the effectiveness and safety of fingolimod was assessed in Seville's' (Spain) clinical practice. This retrospective study in MS patients assessed effectiveness (relapses, EDSS, gadolinium-enhancing T1 and new/enlarged T2-weighted lesions): total cohort (n = 249) and stratified according to prior treatment (glatiramer acetate/interferon beta-1 [immunomodulator], natalizumab, naïve), gender, basal EDSS score, basal Gd+ lesions, ARR prior to treatment, age at treatment initiation and number of prior treatments. A multivariante model was used to assess the ARR with baseline characteristics. The safety profile (adverse events [AEs]) was also described. Fingolimod reduced the annualized relapse rate (ARR) by 75%, 67% and 85% in the total cohort, patients previously treated with immunomodulatory and naïve patients (p<0.0001 all cases). However, patients previously treated with natalizumab kept a constant ARR. The ARR results and the consequent increase in the proportion of relapse-free patients were independent of the age at treatment initiation, number of prior treatments, gender and basal Gd+ lesions. Although fingolimod was effective regardless the basal EDSS score and ARR prior to fingolimod treatment, better outcomes were observed in patients with basal EDSS score <3 (0.2 vs. 0.4; p = 0.0244) and ARR ≥ 2 prior to fingolimod treatment (p = 0.0338). Only the basal EDSS score was association with ARR in the first 24 months of fingolimod treatment in the multivariante model (p = 0.0439). The cumulative probability of disability progression was 20% (month-24) in the total cohort, and was independent from prior treatment, age at treatment initiation, number of prior treatments, gender, basal EDSS score, basal Gd+ lesions and ARR prior to treatment. The real-world fingolimod benefits observed in this study seem to be similar than those observed in previous clinical trials.

Project description:IntroductionLimited comparative effectiveness data for rituximab (RTX) versus natalizumab (NTZ), fingolimod (FTY), and dimethyl fumarate (DMF) for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) exist.MethodsClinician-reported data on patients prescribed RTX, NTZ, FTY, or DMF for the treatment of MS at the Rocky Mountain MS Center at the University of Colorado were retrospectively collected. Outcomes included a composite effectiveness measure consisting of clinical relapse, contrast-enhancing lesions, and/or new T2 lesions, individual effectiveness outcomes, and discontinuation. Logistic regression was used on patients matched by propensity scores and using average treatment effect on treated doubly robust weighting estimator.ResultsA total of 182, 451, 271, and 342 patients initiated RTX, NTZ, FTY, and DMF and were followed for 2 years. Before and after adjustment, the odds of experiencing disease activity was significantly higher for FTY [adjusted OR (aOR) = 3.17 (95% CI: 1.81-5.55), P < 0.001].and DMF [aOR = 2.68 (95% CI:1.67-4.29), P < 0.001], and similar for NTZ [aOR = 1.36 (95% CI:0.83-2.23), P = 0.216] versus RTX. When examining months 6-24, NTZ demonstrated higher odds of disease activity compared to RTX [aOR = 2.21 (95% CI: 1.20-4.06), P = 0.007]. Similar odds of discontinuation were seen between NTZ and RTX [aOR = 1.39 (95% CI: 0.88-2.20), P = 0.157]; however, FTY [aOR = 2.02 (95% CI: 1.24-3.30), P = 0.005] and DMF [aOR = 3.27 (95% CI: 2.15-4.97), P < 0.001] had greater odds of discontinuation than RTX.InterpretationRTX demonstrated superior effectiveness and discontinuation outcomes compared to FTY and DMF. Although RTX demonstrated similar effectiveness and discontinuation compared to NTZ, RTX had superior effectiveness during months 6-24 and fewer discontinuations when excluding discontinuations due to insurance issues. Results suggest superiority of RTX in reducing disease activity and maintaining long-term treatment in a real-world MS cohort.

Project description:Importance:Comparative real-world effectiveness studies of initial disease-modifying treatment (DMT) choices for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) that include rituximab are lacking. Objective:To assess the effectiveness and drug discontinuation rates of rituximab among patients with newly diagnosed RRMS compared with injectable DMTs, dimethyl fumarate, fingolimod, or natalizumab. Design, Setting, and Patients:This retrospective cohort study used prospectively collected data to examine specialized care of 2 Swedish county-based community samples of patients with RRMS. Patients with RRMS who received diagnoses from January 1, 2012, to October 31, 2015, who resided in Stockholm or Västerbotten Counties were identified from a Swedish multiple sclerosis registry. Main Outcomes and Measures:All reasons for drug discontinuation of initial treatment choice (main outcome) and specific reasons for switching (secondary outcomes) were analyzed with multivariable Cox regression, including propensity scores. Results:Among 494 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 34.4 [27.4-43.4] years; 158 men [32.0%]), 215 received an injectable DMT (43.5%); 86 (17.4%), dimethyl fumarate; 17 (3.4%), fingolimod; 50 (10.1%), natalizumab; 120 (24.3%), rituximab; and 6 (1.2%), other DMT. Regional preferences were pronounced, with 42 of 52 (81%) and 78 of 442 (18%) receiving rituximab in Västerbotten and Stockholm, respectively. The annual discontinuation rate for rituximab, injectable DMTs, dimethyl fumarate, fingolimod, and natalizumab were 0.03, 0.53, 0.32, 0.38, and 0.29, respectively. Continued disease activity was the main reason for discontinuation of injectable DMTs, dimethyl fumarate, and fingolimod; positive John Cunningham virus serology results were the main reason for discontinuation of natalizumab. Rate of clinical relapses and/or neuroradiologic disease activity were significantly lower for rituximab compared with injectable DMTs and dimethyl fumarate, with a tendency for lower relapse rates also compared with natalizumab and fingolimod. The annual discontinuation rate of initial treatment choice was significantly lower in Västerbotten compared with Stockholm (0.09 and 0.37, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance:Rituximab was superior to all other DMT in terms of drug discontinuation and displayed better clinical efficacy compared with injectable DMTs and dimethyl fumarate with borderline significance compared with natalizumab and fingolimod. The county where rituximab constituted the main initial treatment choice displayed better outcomes in most measured variables. Collectively, our findings suggest that rituximab performs better than other commonly used DMTs in patients with newly diagnosed RRMS.