Dataset Information

High-Efficacy Therapies for Treatment-Naive Individuals with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.

ABSTRACT: There are > 18 distinct disease-modifying therapy (DMT) options covering 10 mechanisms of action currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Given the multitude of available treatment options, and recent international consensus guidelines offering differing recommendations, there is broad heterogeneity in how the DMTs are used in clinical practice. Choosing a DMT for newly diagnosed patients with MS is currently a topic of significant debate in MS care. Historically, an escalation approach to DMT was used for newly diagnosed patients with RRMS. However, the evidence for clinical benefits of early treatment with high-efficacy therapies (HETs) in this population is emerging. In this review, we provide an overview of the DMT options and MS treatment strategies, and discuss the clinical benefits of HETs (including ofatumumab, ocrelizumab, natalizumab, alemtuzumab, and cladribine) in the early stages of MS, along with safety concerns associated with these DMTs. By minimizing the accumulation of neurological damage early in the disease course, early treatment with HETs may enhance long-term clinical outcomes over the lifetime of the patient.

SUBMITTER: Freeman L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9645316 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

High-Efficacy Therapies for Treatment-Naïve Individuals with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.

Freeman Léorah L Longbrake Erin E EE Coyle Patricia K PK Hendin Barry B Vollmer Timothy T

CNS drugs 20221109 12

There are > 18 distinct disease-modifying therapy (DMT) options covering 10 mechanisms of action currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Given the multitude of available treatment options, and recent international consensus guidelines offering differing recommendations, there is broad heterogeneity in how the DMTs are used in clinical practice. Choosing a DMT for newly diagnosed patients with MS is currently a ...[more]

PMID: 36350491

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Recent data from animal models of multiple sclerosis (MS) and from a pilot study indicated a possible beneficial impact of statins on MS. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Safety, tolerability and effects on disease activity of atorvastatin given alone or in combination with interferon-beta (IFN-beta) were assessed in a phase II open-label baseline-to-treatment trial in relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). Patients with at least one gadolinium-enhancing lesion (CEL) at screening by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were eligible for the study. After a baseline period of 3 monthly MRI scans (months -2 to 0), patients followed a 9-month treatment period on 80 mg atorvastatin daily. The number of CEL in treatment months 6 to 9 compared to baseline served as the primary endpoint. Other MRI-based parameters as well as changes in clinical scores and immune responses served as secondary endpoints. Of 80 RRMS patients screened, 41 were included, among them 16 with IFN-beta comedication. The high dose of 80 mg atorvastatin was well tolerated in the majority of patients, regardless of IFN-beta comedication. Atorvastatin treatment led to a substantial reduction in the number and volume of CEL in two-sided multivariate analysis (p = 0.003 and p = 0.008). A trend towards a significant decrease in number and volume of CEL was also detected in patients with IFN-beta comedication (p = 0.060 and p = 0.062), in contrast to patients without IFN-beta comedication (p = 0.170 and p = 0.140). Immunological investigations showed no suppression in T cell response but a significant increase in IL-10 production. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:Our data suggest that high-dose atorvastatin treatment in RRMS is safe and well tolerated. Moreover, MRI analysis indicates a possible beneficial effect of atorvastatin, alone or in combination with IFN-beta, on the development of new CEL. Thus, our findings provide a rationale for phase II/III trials, including combination of atorvastatin with already approved immunomodulatory therapy regimens. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00616187.

Project description:Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic demyelinating disease of the central nervous system and mainly affects young adults. Its natural history has changed in recent years with the advent of disease-modifying drugs, which have been available since the early 1990s. The increasing number of first-line and second-line treatment options, together with the variable course of the disease and patient lifestyles and expectations, makes the therapeutic decision a real challenge. The aim of this review is to give a comprehensive overview of the main present and some future drugs for relapsing-remitting MS, including risk-benefit considerations, to enable readers to draw their own conclusions regarding the risk-benefit assessment of personalized treatment strategies, taking into account not only treatment-related but also disease-related risks. We performed a Medline literature search to identify studies on the treatment of MS with risk stratification and risk-benefit considerations. We focused our attention on studies of disease-modifying, immunomodulating, and immunosuppressive drugs, including monoclonal antibodies. Here we offer personal considerations, stemming from long-term experience in the treatment of MS and thorough discussions with other neurologists closely involved in the care of patients with the disease. MS specialists need to know not only the specific risks and benefits of single drugs, but also about drug interactions, either in simultaneous or serial combination therapy, and patient comorbidities, preferences, and fears. This has to be put into perspective, considering also the risks of untreated disease in patients with different clinical and radiological characteristics. There is no single best treatment strategy, but therapy has to be tailored to the patient. This is a time-consuming task, rich in complexity, and influenced by the attitude towards risk on the parts of both the patient and the clinical team. The broader the MS drug market becomes, the harder it will be for the clinician to help the patient decide which therapeutic strategy to opt for.

Project description:BackgroundTreatment satisfaction in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) may impact adherence and thus clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to measure the satisfaction of patients with RRMS with injectable disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) and to evaluate the factors associated with treatment satisfaction.Material and methodsIn this observational retrospective study conducted in the neurology departments of 35 hospitals throughout Spain, demographic data, disease characteristics, and information on treatment with injectable DMTs were collected at a single scheduled visit. Treatment satisfaction was assessed using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), version 1.4. Patients also answered complementary questions about the factors that might affect treatment satisfaction. The data collected were analyzed descriptively. A regression model was used to explore the factors associated with treatment satisfaction.ResultsThe study included 445 patients (mean±SD age, 41±10.2 years; two-thirds women). The percentages treated with each DMT were Avonex 28.5%, Rebif 44 μg 24.5%, Copaxone 22.5%, Betaferon 13.0%, Rebif22 μg 8.3% and Extavia 3.1%. The mean±SD overall satisfaction according to the TSQM was 68.8±18.6 and the highest overall satisfaction was reported for Rebif 22 μg (72.4±20.3) and the lowest for Extavia (61.7±23.7). In the regression analysis, rehabilitation, interference with social life, pain on injection and number of MS treatments received were significantly associated with a decrease in overall TSMQ score. A small but significant negative correlation was found between EDSS scores and TSMQ scores (rho = -0.11, p = 0.02) and effectiveness (rho = -0.17, p<0.001). A perceived inconvenience of injections was reflected by the stated preference of 83% for once-daily oral treatment over other administration routes.ConclusionsPatients on stable injectable DMT therapy were reasonably satisfied with their treatment. Our results suggest that the main source of dissatisfaction with the current treatment is the inconvenience of the administration regimen.

Project description:BackgroundIn relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), extended exposure to high-efficacy disease modifying therapy may increase the risk of side effects, compromise treatment adherence, and inflate medical costs. Treatment de-escalation, here defined as a switch to a lower efficacy therapy, is often considered by patients and physicians, but evidence to guide such decisions is scarce. In this study, we aimed to compare clinical outcomes between patients who de-escalated therapy versus those who continued their therapy.MethodsIn this retrospective analysis of data from an observational, longitudinal cohort of 87,239 patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) from 186 centers across 43 countries, we matched treatment episodes of adult patients with RRMS who underwent treatment de-escalation from either high- to medium-, high- to low-, or medium- to low-efficacy therapy with counterparts that continued their treatment, using propensity score matching and incorporating 11 variables. Relapses and 6-month confirmed disability worsening were assessed using proportional and cumulative hazard models.ResultsMatching resulted in 876 pairs (de-escalators: 73% females, median [interquartile range], age 40.2 years [33.6, 48.8], Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] 2.5 [1.5, 4.0]; non-de-escalators: 73% females, age 40.8 years [35.5, 47.9], and EDSS 2.5 [1.5, 4.0]), with a median follow-up of 4.8 years (IQR 3.0, 6.8). Patients who underwent de-escalation faced an increased hazard of future relapses (hazard ratio 2.36 and 95% confidence intervals [CI] [1.79-3.11], p < 0.001), which was confirmed when considering recurrent relapses (2.43 [1.97-3.00], p < 0.001). It was also consistent across subgroups stratified by age, sex, disability, disease duration, and time since last relapse.ConclusionsOn the basis of this observational analysis, de-escalation may not be recommended as a universal treatment strategy in RRMS. The decision to de-escalate should be considered on an individual basis, as its safety is not clearly guided by specific patient or disease characteristics evaluated in this study.

Project description:IntroductionNo head-to-head trials have compared the efficacy of the oral therapies, fingolimod, dimethyl fumarate and teriflunomide, in multiple sclerosis. Statistical modeling approaches, which control for differences in patient characteristics, can improve indirect comparisons of the efficacy of these therapies.MethodsNo evidence of disease activity (NEDA) was evaluated as the proportion of patients free from relapses and 3-month confirmed disability progression (clinical composite), free from gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions and new or newly enlarged T2 lesions (magnetic resonance imaging composite), or free from all disease measures (overall composite). For each measure, the efficacy of fingolimod was estimated by analyzing individual patient data from fingolimod phase 3 trials using methodologies from studies of other oral therapies. These data were then used to build binomial regression models, which adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics between the studies. Models predicted the indirect relative risk of achieving NEDA status for fingolimod versus dimethyl fumarate or teriflunomide in an average patient from their respective phase 3 trials.ResultsThe estimated relative risks of achieving NEDA status for fingolimod versus placebo in a pooled fingolimod trial population were numerically greater (i.e., fingolimod more efficacious) than the estimated relative risks for dimethyl fumarate or teriflunomide versus placebo in each respective trial population. In indirect comparisons, the predicted relative risks for all composite measures were better for fingolimod than comparator when tested against the trial populations of those treated with dimethyl fumarate (relative risk, clinical: 1.21 [95% confidence interval 1.06-1.39]; overall: 1.67 [1.08-2.57]), teriflunomide 7 mg (clinical: 1.22 [1.02-1.46]; overall: 2.01 [1.38-2.93]) and teriflunomide 14 mg (clinical: 1.14 [0.96-1.36]; overall: 1.61 [1.12-2.31]).ConclusionOur modeling approach suggests that fingolimod therapy results in a higher probability of NEDA than dimethyl fumarate and teriflunomide therapy when phase 3 trial data are indirectly compared and differences between trials are adjusted for.

Dataset Information

High-Efficacy Therapies for Treatment-Naive Individuals with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.

Publications

High-Efficacy Therapies for Treatment-Naïve Individuals with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets