Discontinuation of injectable disease-modifying therapy (DMT) for multiple sclerosis (MS) after a long period of relapse freedom is frequently considered, but data on post-cessation disease course ...are lacking.
(1) To compare time to first relapse and disability progression among 'DMT stoppers' and propensity-score matched 'DMT stayers' in the MSBase Registry; (2) To identify predictors of time to first relapse and disability progression in DMT stoppers.
Inclusion criteria for DMT stoppers were: age ≥18 years; no relapses for ≥5 years at DMT discontinuation; follow-up for ≥3 years after stopping DMT; not restarting DMT for ≥3 months after discontinuation. DMT stayers were required to have no relapses for ≥5 years at baseline, and were propensity-score matched to stoppers for age, sex, disability (Expanded Disability Status Score), disease duration and time on treatment. Relapse and disability progression events in matched stoppers and stayers were compared using a marginal Cox model. Predictors of first relapse and disability progression among DMT stoppers were investigated using a Cox proportional hazards model.
Time to first relapse among 485 DMT stoppers and 854 stayers was similar (adjusted HR, aHR=1.07, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.37; p=0.584), while time to confirmed disability progression was significantly shorter among DMT stoppers than stayers (aHR=1.47, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.84, p=0.001). The difference in hazards of progression was due mainly to patients who had not experienced disability progression in the prebaseline treatment period.
Patients with MS who discontinued injectable DMT after a long period of relapse freedom had a similar relapse rate as propensity score-matched patients who continued on DMT, but higher hazard for disability progression.
Summary Background Alemtuzumab, an anti-CD52 antibody, is proven to be more efficacious than interferon beta-1a in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, but its efficacy relative ...to more potent immunotherapies is unknown. We compared the effectiveness of alemtuzumab with natalizumab, fingolimod, and interferon beta in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis treated for up to 5 years. Methods In this international cohort study, we used data from propensity-matched patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis from the MSBase and six other cohorts. Longitudinal clinical data were obtained from 71 MSBase centres in 21 countries and from six non-MSBase centres in the UK and Germany between Nov 1, 2015, and June 30, 2016. Key inclusion criteria were a diagnosis of definite relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, exposure to one of the study therapies (alemtuzumab, interferon beta, fingolimod, or natalizumab), age 65 years or younger, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score 6·5 or lower, and no more than 10 years since the first multiple sclerosis symptom. The primary endpoint was annualised relapse rate. The secondary endpoints were cumulative hazards of relapses, disability accumulation, and disability improvement events. We compared relapse rates with negative binomial models, and estimated cumulative hazards with conditional proportional hazards models. Findings Patients were treated between Aug 1, 1994, and June 30, 2016. The cohorts consisted of 189 patients given alemtuzumab, 2155 patients given interferon beta, 828 patients given fingolimod, and 1160 patients given natalizumab. Alemtuzumab was associated with a lower annualised relapse rate than interferon beta (0·19 95% CI 0·14–0·23 vs 0·53 0·46–0·61, p<0·0001) and fingolimod (0·15 0·10–0·20 vs 0·34 0·26–0·41, p<0·0001), and was associated with a similar annualised relapse rate as natalizumab (0·20 0·14–0·26 vs 0·19 0·15–0·23, p=0·78). For the disability outcomes, alemtuzumab was associated with similar probabilities of disability accumulation as interferon beta (hazard ratio HR 0·66 95% CI 0·36–1·22, p=0·37), fingolimod (1·27 0·60–2·70, p=0·67), and natalizumab (0·81 0·47–1·39, p=0·60). Alemtuzumab was associated with similar probabilities of disability improvement as interferon beta (0·98 0·65–1·49, p=0·93) and fingolimod (0·50 0·25–1·01, p=0·18), and a lower probability of disability improvement than natalizumab (0·35 0·20–0·59, p=0·0006). Interpretation Alemtuzumab and natalizumab seem to have similar effects on annualised relapse rates in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Alemtuzumab seems superior to fingolimod and interferon beta in mitigating relapse activity. Natalizumab seems superior to alemtuzumab in enabling recovery from disability. Both natalizumab and alemtuzumab seem highly effective and viable immunotherapies for multiple sclerosis. Treatment decisions between alemtuzumab and natalizumab should be primarily governed by their safety profiles. Funding National Health and Medical Research Council, and the University of Melbourne.
Objective
In patients suffering multiple sclerosis activity despite treatment with interferon β or glatiramer acetate, clinicians often switch therapy to either natalizumab or fingolimod. However, no ...studies have directly compared the outcomes of switching to either of these agents.
Methods
Using MSBase, a large international, observational, prospectively acquired cohort study, we identified patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis experiencing relapses or disability progression within the 6 months immediately preceding switch to either natalizumab or fingolimod. Quasi‐randomization with propensity score–based matching was used to select subpopulations with comparable baseline characteristics. Relapse and disability outcomes were compared in paired, pairwise‐censored analyses.
Results
Of the 792 included patients, 578 patients were matched (natalizumab, n = 407; fingolimod, n = 171). Mean on‐study follow‐up was 12 months. The annualized relapse rates decreased from 1.5 to 0.2 on natalizumab and from 1.3 to 0.4 on fingolimod, with 50% relative postswitch difference in relapse hazard (p = 0.002). A 2.8 times higher rate of sustained disability regression was observed after the switch to natalizumab in comparison to fingolimod (p < 0.001). No difference in the rate of sustained disability progression events was observed between the groups. The change in overall disability burden (quantified as area under the disability–time curve) differed between natalizumab and fingolimod (−0.12 vs 0.04 per year, respectively, p < 0.001).
Interpretation
This study suggests that in active multiple sclerosis during treatment with injectable disease‐modifying therapies, switching to natalizumab is more effective than switching to fingolimod in reducing relapse rate and short‐term disability burden. Ann Neurol 2015;77:425–435
Background:
The risk factors for conversion from relapsing-remitting to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis remain highly contested.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to determine the ...demographic, clinical and paraclinical features that influence the risk of conversion to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.
Methods:
Patients with adult-onset relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis and at least four recorded disability scores were selected from MSBase, a global observational cohort. The risk of conversion to objectively defined secondary progressive multiple sclerosis was evaluated at multiple time points per patient using multivariable marginal Cox regression models. Sensitivity analyses were performed.
Results:
A total of 15,717 patients were included in the primary analysis. Older age (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02, p < 0.001), longer disease duration (HR = 1.01, p = 0.038), a higher Expanded Disability Status Scale score (HR = 1.30, p < 0.001), more rapid disability trajectory (HR = 2.82, p < 0.001) and greater number of relapses in the previous year (HR = 1.07, p = 0.010) were independently associated with an increased risk of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Improving disability (HR = 0.62, p = 0.039) and disease-modifying therapy exposure (HR = 0.71, p = 0.007) were associated with a lower risk. Recent cerebral magnetic resonance imaging activity, evidence of spinal cord lesions and oligoclonal bands in the cerebrospinal fluid were not associated with the risk of conversion.
Conclusion:
Risk of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis increases with age, duration of illness and worsening disability and decreases with improving disability. Therapy may delay the onset of secondary progression.
Objective:
This propensity score–matched analysis from MSBase compared the effectiveness of cladribine with interferon β, fingolimod or natalizumab.
Methods:
We identified all patients with ...relapse-onset multiple sclerosis, exposure to the study therapies and ⩾1-year on-treatment follow-up from MSBase. Three pairwise propensity score–matched analyses compared treatment outcomes over 1 year. The outcomes were hazards of first relapse, disability accumulation and disability improvement events. Sensitivity analyses were completed.
Results:
The cohorts consisted of 37 (cladribine), 1940 (interferon), 1892 (fingolimod) and 1410 patients (natalizumab). The probability of experiencing a relapse on cladribine was lower than on interferon (p = 0.05), similar to fingolimod (p = 0.31) and higher than on natalizumab (p = 0.042). The probability of disability accumulation on cladribine was similar to interferon (p = 0.37) and fingolimod (p = 0.089) but greater than natalizumab (p = 0.021). The probability of disability improvement was higher on cladribine than interferon (p = 0.00017), fingolimod (p = 0.0025) or natalizumab (p = 0.00099). Sensitivity analyses largely confirmed the above results.
Conclusion:
Cladribine is an effective therapy for relapse-onset multiple sclerosis. Its effect on relapses is comparable to fingolimod and its effect on disability accrual is comparable to interferon β and fingolimod. Cladribine may potentially associate with superior recovery from disability relative to interferon, fingolimod and natalizumab.
Background:
Increasingly, people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) are switched to highly effective disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) such as ocrelizumab.
Objective:
To determine ...predictors of relapse and disability progression when switching from another DMT to ocrelizumab.
Methods:
Patients with RRMS who switched to ocrelizumab were identified from the MSBase Registry and grouped by prior disease-modifying therapy (pDMT; interferon-β/glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, teriflunomide, fingolimod or natalizumab) and washout duration (<1 month, 1–2 months or 2–6 months). Survival analyses including multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to identify predictors of on-ocrelizumab relapse within 1 year, and 6-month confirmed disability progression (CDP).
Results:
After adjustment, relapse hazard when switching from fingolimod was greater than other pDMTs, but only in the first 3 months of ocrelizumab therapy (hazard ratio (HR) = 3.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.57–11.11, p = 0.004). The adjusted hazard for CDP was significantly higher with longer washout (2–6 m compared to <1 m: HR = 9.57, 95% CI = 1.92–47.64, p = 0.006).
Conclusion:
The risk of disability worsening during switch to ocrelizumab is reduced by short treatment gaps. Patients who cease fingolimod are at heightened relapse risk in the first 3 months on ocrelizumab. Prospective evaluation of strategies such as washout reduction may help optimise this switch.
Background:
In the absence of evidence from randomised controlled trials, observational data can be used to emulate clinical trials and guide clinical decisions. Observational studies are, however, ...susceptible to confounding and bias. Among the used techniques to reduce indication bias are propensity score matching and marginal structural models.
Objective:
To use the comparative effectiveness of fingolimod vs natalizumab to compare the results obtained with propensity score matching and marginal structural models.
Methods:
Patients with clinically isolated syndrome or relapsing remitting MS who were treated with either fingolimod or natalizumab were identified in the MSBase registry. Patients were propensity score matched, and inverse probability of treatment weighted at six monthly intervals, using the following variables: age, sex, disability, MS duration, MS course, prior relapses, and prior therapies. Studied outcomes were cumulative hazard of relapse, disability accumulation, and disability improvement.
Results:
4608 patients (1659 natalizumab, 2949 fingolimod) fulfilled inclusion criteria, and were propensity score matched or repeatedly reweighed with marginal structural models. Natalizumab treatment was associated with a lower probability of relapse (PS matching: HR 0.67 95% CI 0.62-0.80; marginal structural model: 0.71 0.62-0.80), and higher probability of disability improvement (PS matching: 1.21 1.02 -1.43; marginal structural model 1.43 1.19 -1.72). There was no evidence of a difference in the magnitude of effect between the two methods.
Conclusions:
The relative effectiveness of two therapies can be efficiently compared by either marginal structural models or propensity score matching when applied in clearly defined clinical contexts and in sufficiently powered cohorts.
Background:
The magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis (MAGNIMS) score combines relapses and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions to predict disability outcomes in relapsing–remitting ...multiple sclerosis (RRMS) treated with interferon-β.
Objective:
To validate the MAGNIMS score and extend to other disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). To examine the prognostic value of gadolinium contrast-enhancing (Gd+) lesions.
Methods:
This RRMS MSBase cohort study (n = 2293) used a Cox model to examine the prognostic value of relapses, MRI activity and the MAGNIMS score for disability worsening during treatment with interferon-β and three other DMTs.
Results:
Three new T2 lesions (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.60, p = 0.028) or two relapses (HR = 2.24, p = 0.002) on interferon-β (for 12 months) were predictive of disability worsening over 4 years. MAGNIMS score = 2 (1 relapse and ⩾3 T2 lesions or ⩾2 relapses) was associated with a greater risk of disability worsening on interferon-β (HR = 2.0, p = 0.001). In pooled cohort of four DMTs, similar associations were seen (MAGNIMS score = 2: HR = 1.72, p = 0.001). Secondary analyses demonstrated that the addition of Gd+ to the MAGNIMS did not materially improve its prediction of disability worsening.
Conclusion:
We have validated the MAGNIMS score in RRMS and extended its application to three other DMTs: 1 relapse and ⩾3 T2 lesions or ⩾2 relapses predicted worsening of disability. Contrast-enhancing lesions did not substantially improve the prognostic score.
Background:
The current best practice suggests yearly magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to monitor treatment response in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients.
Objective:
To evaluate the current practice ...of clinicians changing MS treatment based on subclinical new MRI lesions alone.
Methods:
Using MSBase, an international MS patient registry with MRI data, we analysed the probability of treatment change among patients with clinically silent new MRI lesions.
Results:
A total of 8311 MRI brain scans of 4232 patients were identified. Around 26.9% (336/1247) MRIs with one new T2 lesion were followed by disease-modifying therapy (DMT) change, increasing to 50.2% (129/257) with six new T2 lesions. DMT change was twice as likely with new T1 contrast enhancing compared to new T2 lesions odds ratio (OR): 2.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.00–2.96 vs OR: 1.26 (95% CI: 1.22–1.29). DMT change with new MRI lesions occurred most frequently with ‘injectable’ DMTs. The probability of switching therapy was greater only after high-efficacy therapies became available in 2007 (after, OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.28–1.59 vs before, OR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.520–1.88).
Conclusion:
MS clinicians rely increasingly on MRI alone in their treatment decisions, utilizing low thresholds (1 new T2 lesion) for optimizing MS therapy. This signals a shift towards no evidence of disease activity (NEDA)-3 since high-efficacy therapies became available.
High-efficacy therapies in multiple sclerosis are traditionally used after unsuccessful treatment with first-line disease modifying therapies. We hypothesised that early commencement of high-efficacy ...therapy would be associated with reduced long-term disability. We therefore aimed to compare long-term disability outcomes between patients who started high-efficacy therapies within 2 years of disease onset with those who started 4–6 years after disease onset.
In this retrospective international observational study, we obtained data from the MSBase registry and the Swedish MS registry, which prospectively collect patient data that are specific to multiple sclerosis as part of routine clinical care. We identified adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, with at least 6 years of follow-up since disease onset, and who started the high-efficacy therapy (rituximab, ocrelizumab, mitoxantrone, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab) either 0–2 years (early) or 4–6 years (late) after clinical disease onset. We matched patients in the early and late groups using propensity scores calculated on the basis of their baseline clinical and demographic data. The primary outcome was disability, measured with the Expanded Disability Status Score (EDSS; an ordinal scale of 0–10, with higher scores indicating increased disability), at 6–10 years after disease onset, assessed with a linear mixed-effects model.
We identified 6149 patients in the MSBase registry who had been given high-efficacy therapy, with data collected between Jan 1, 1975, and April 13, 2017, and 2626 patients in the Swedish MS Registry, with data collected between Dec 10, 1997, and Sept 16, 2019. Of whom, 308 in the MSBase registry and 236 in the Swedish MS registry were eligible for inclusion. 277 (51%) of 544 patients commenced therapy early and 267 (49%) commenced therapy late. For the primary analysis, we matched 213 patients in the early treatment group with 253 in the late treatment group. At baseline, the mean EDSS score was 2·2 (SD 1·2) in the early group and 2·1 (SD 1·2) in the late group. Median follow-up time for matched patients was 7·8 years (IQR 6·7–8·9). In the sixth year after disease onset, the mean EDSS score was 2·2 (SD 1·6) in the early group compared with 2·9 (SD 1·8) in the late group (p<0·0001). This difference persisted throughout each year of follow-up until the tenth year after disease onset (mean EDSS score 2·3 SD 1·8 vs 3·5 SD 2·1; p<0·0001), with a difference between groups of −0·98 (95% CI −1·51 to −0·45; p<0·0001, adjusted for proportion of time on any disease-modifying therapy) across the 6–10 year follow-up period.
High-efficacy therapy commenced within 2 years of disease onset is associated with less disability after 6–10 years than when commenced later in the disease course. This finding can inform decisions regarding optimal sequence and timing of multiple sclerosis therapy.
National Health and Medical Research Council Australia and MS Society UK.
PDF
