Benefit–Risk Analysis of Glatiramer Acetate for Relapsing-Remitting and Clinically Isolated Syndrome Multiple Sclerosis

Alternative Activation of Macrophages through Interleukin-13-Loaded Extra-Large-Pore Mesoporous Silica Nanoparticles Suppresses Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment via cytokine-mediated immunomodulation has been hampered by the difficulty with which cytokines can be stably and noninvasively delivered to the central nervous system. Here, we show that interleukin (IL)-13 packaged in extra-large-pore mesoporous silica nanoparticles (XL-MSNs) is protected from degradation and directs the alternative activation of macrophages both in vitro and in vivo. Furthermore, the noninvasive intranasal delivery of IL-13-loaded XL-MSNs ameliorated the symptoms of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, a murine model of MS, accompanied by the induction of chemokines orchestrating immune cell infiltration. These results demonstrate the therapeutic potential of IL-13-loaded XL-MSNs for MS patients.

The effect of IFN-β 1a on expression of MDA5 and RIG-1 in multiple sclerosis patients

The aims of this study were to compare mRNA levels of melanoma differentiation-associated protein 5 (MDA5) and retinoic acid-inducible gene 1 (RIG-1) in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients in comparison to the healthy controls as well as investigating the effects of IFN-β 1a on the expression of these molecules. In this study, mRNA levels of MDA5 and RIG-1 in peripheral leukocytes of 30 new cases of MS patients and 35 healthy controls were evaluated using the real-time-PCR method. mRNA levels of MDA5 and RIG-1 were determined in the MS patients 6 months after treatment with standard doses of IFN-β 1a. mRNA levels of MDA5 and RIG-1 were significantly decreased in the MS patients in comparison to the healthy controls. The analysis also revealed that IFN-β 1a therapy leads to the upregulation of RIG-1, but not MDA5, in the total MS patients and the female group. MS patients suffer from insufficient expression of MDA5 and RIG-1, and IFN-β 1a therapy results in the upregulation of RIG-1 in the patients, especially in the female patients. Thus, it seems that IFN-β 1a not only decreased pathogenic inflammatory responses but also modulated the expression of RIG-1 to protect the patients from infectious diseases and upregulation of IFN-I in a positive feedback.

The role of inflammasomes in multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is considered as an inflammatory autoimmune disease of the central nervous system (CNS), with a complex and heterogenic etiology. However, the involvement of inflammation in its pathophysiology is well documented and current therapies for MS are mainly immunosuppressive drugs. Although the available drugs reduce new lesions and relapses, their long-term outcome is not completely satisfactory. Inflammasomes are multimeric protein complexes that play a critical role in the inflammatory process. Several lines of evidence suggest an association between inflammasome activation and MS. In this paper, we have reviewed current studies that demonstrate the involvement of inflammasomes in MS development, in both animal model and MS patients. Furthermore, prior studies about the effect of inflammasome inhibitor drugs on development and progression of MS are discussed.

Pregnancy Outcomes from the Branded Glatiramer Acetate Pregnancy Database

Background

Appropriate counseling and treatment for women with multiple sclerosis (MS) who may become pregnant requires an understanding of the effects of exposure to disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) during pregnancy. Current reports and studies are limited in their usefulness, mostly by small sample size. Branded glatiramer acetate (GA) is a DMT approved for the treatment of relapsing forms of MS. For more than 2 decades, it has been shown to be efficacious and to have a favorable safety profile. The Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd global pharmacovigilance database comprises data from more than 7000 pregnancies, during which women with MS were exposed to treatment with branded GA.

Methods

We analyzed data from Teva's global pharmacovigilance database. Pregnancy outcomes for patients treated with branded GA were compared with reference rates of abnormal pregnancy outcomes reported in two large registries representing the general population.

Results

Pregnancies exposed to branded GA were not at higher risk for congenital anomalies than what is expected in the general population.

Conclusions

These data provide evidence that branded GA exposure during pregnancy seems safe, without teratogenic effect.

Long-term safety and real-world effectiveness of fingolimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis

With a growing number of disease-modifying therapies becoming available for relapsing multiple sclerosis, there is an important need to gather real-world evidence data regarding long-term treatment effectiveness and safety in unselected patient populations. Although not providing as high a level of evidence as randomized controlled trials, and prone to bias, real-world studies from observational studies or registries nevertheless provide crucial information on real-world outcomes of a given therapy. In addition, evaluation of treatment satisfaction and impact on quality of life are increasingly regarded as complementary outcome measures. Fingolimod was the first oral disease-modifying therapy approved for relapsing multiple sclerosis. This review aims to summarize current knowledge on the long-term effectiveness and safety outcomes of multiple sclerosis patients on fingolimod. Impact on treatment satisfaction and quality of life will be discussed according to available data.

Multiple sclerosis: Therapeutic applications of advancing drug delivery systems

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory autoimmune disease of the central nervous system, which is accompanying with demyelination, neurodegeneration and sensibility to oxidative stress. In MS, auto-reactive lymphocytes cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and reside in the perivenous demyelinating lesions which create various distinct inflammatory demyelinated plaques situated predominantly in the white matter. The current MS-related therapeutic approaches can be classified into disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) and symptomatic therapy. DMTs suppress circulating immune cells, inhibit passing the BBB and decrease the inflammatory responses. Recent advances have remarkably delayed disease development and improved the quality of life for numerous patients. In spite of major improvements in therapeutic options, there are some limitations regarding the routes of administration and the necessity for repeated and long-term dosing in which cause to systemic disadvantageous consequences and patient non-compliance. Nanotechnology presents promising approaches to improve autoimmune disease treatment with the capability to overcome many of the limitations common to the current immunosuppressive and biological therapies. Here we emphasis on nanomedicine-based drug delivery approaches of biological immunomodulatory mediators for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. This comprehensive review details the most successful drugs in MS therapy and also focuses on conceptions and clinical potential of novel nanomedicine attitudes for inducing immunosuppression and immunological tolerance in MS to modulate abnormal and pathologic immune responses.

Interferons-beta versus glatiramer acetate for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Interferons-beta (IFNs-beta) and glatiramer acetate (GA) were the first two disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) approved 20 years ago for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). DMTs' prescription rates as first or switching therapies and their costs have both increased substantially over the past decade. As more DMTs become available, the choice of a specific DMT should reflect the risk/benefit profile, as well as the impact on quality of life. As MS cohorts enrolled in different studies can vary significantly, head-to-head trials are considered the best approach for gaining objective reliable data when two different drugs are compared. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarise available evidence on the comparative effectiveness of IFNs-beta and GA on disease course through the analysis of head-to-head trials.This is an update of the Cochrane review 'Interferons-beta versus glatiramer acetate for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis' (first published in the Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 7).

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether IFNs-beta and GA differ in terms of safety and efficacy in the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting (RR) MS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Trials Register of the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group (08 August 2016) and the reference lists of retrieved articles. We contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing directly IFNs-beta versus GA in study participants affected by RRMS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Six trials were included and five trials contributed to this review with data. A total of 2904 participants were randomly assigned to IFNs (1704) and GA (1200). The treatment duration was three years for one study, two years for the other four RCTs while one study was stopped early (after one year). The IFNs analysed in comparison with GA were IFN-beta 1b 250 mcg (two trials, 933 participants), IFN-beta 1a 44 mcg (three trials, 466 participants) and IFN-beta 1a 30 mcg (two trials, 305 participants). Enrolled participants were affected by active RRMS. All studies were at high risk for attrition bias. Three trials are still ongoing, one of them completed.Both therapies showed similar clinical efficacy at 24 months, given the primary outcome variables (number of participants with relapse (risk ratio (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.24) or progression (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.35). However at 36 months, evidence from a single study suggests that relapse rates were higher in the group given IFNs than in the GA group (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.74, P value 0.002).Secondary magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes analysis showed that effects on new or enlarging T2- or new contrast-enhancing T1 lesions at 24 months were similar (mean difference (MD) -0.15, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.39, and MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.02, respectively). However, the reduction in T2- and T1-weighted lesion volume was significantly greater in the groups given IFNs than in the GA groups (MD -0.58, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.18, P value 0.004, and MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.33 to -0.07, P value 0.003, respectively).The number of participants who dropped out of the study because of adverse events was similar in the two groups (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.40).The quality of evidence for primary outcomes was judged as moderate for clinical end points, but for safety and some MRI outcomes (number of active T2 lesions), quality was judged as low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of IFNs-beta and GA in the treatment of people with RRMS, including clinical (e.g. people with relapse, risk to progression) and MRI (Gd-enhancing lesions) measures, seem to be similar or to show only small differences. When MRI lesion load accrual is considered, the effect of the two treatments differs, in that IFNs-beta were found to limit the increase in lesion burden as compared with GA. Evidence was insufficient for a comparison of the effects of the two treatments on patient-reported outcomes, such as quality-of-life measures.

Cost analysis of glatiramer acetate versus interferon-β for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in patients with spasticity: the Escala study

OBJECTIVE

The Escala Study evidenced that the administration of glatiramer acetate for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis improved the spasticity of patients previously treated with interferon-β. However, whether such an improvement was translated into cost savings remained unclear. We therefore conducted a cost analysis of glatiramer acetate versus interferon-β in these patients with multiple sclerosis and spasticity.

METHODS

This cost analysis encompassed data from the observational Escala Study, which included patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and spasticity whose treatment had been switched from interferon-β to glatiramer acetate. Costs prior to starting glatiramer acetate (interferon-β period) were compared to the subsequent six months on glatiramer acetate (glatiramer acetate period). The analysis was carried out following the recommendations for conducting pharmacoeconomic studies and from the Spanish National Health System perspective. Costs associated with multiple sclerosis treatment, spasticity treatment and relapse management were expressed in 2014 euros (€); a 7.5 % discount was applied-when needed-as stipulated in Spanish law.

RESULTS

The management of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, spasticity and relapses accounted for a 6-month cost per patient of 7,078.02€ when using interferon-β and 4,671.31€ when using glatiramer acetate. Switching from interferon-β to glatiramer acetate therefore represented a cost saving of 2,406.72€ per patient in favour of glatiramer acetate, which resulted from savings in treatment costs, relapse management and spasticity treatment of 1,890.02€, 430.48€ and 86.21€, respectively. The ratio of the costs during interferon-β was 1.5 times the costs during glatiramer acetate; thus, a fixed budget of 5,000,000€ would enable 1,070 patients to be treated with glatiramer acetate and only 706 patients with interferon-β.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with glatiramer acetate entailed cost savings when compared to interferon-β in patients with spasticity, which not only resulted from its lower costs of therapy and relapse management but also from its favourable effect on reducing spasticity. Thus, glatiramer acetate may be regarded as a more efficient alternative than interferon-β from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.

Effectiveness of glatiramer acetate compared to other multiple sclerosis therapies

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of glatiramer acetate (GA) compared to other multiple sclerosis (MS) therapies in routine clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Observational cohort study carried out in MS patients treated with GA (GA cohort) or other MS therapies -switched from GA- (non-GA cohort). Study data were obtained through review of our MS patient database. The primary endpoint was the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores reached at the end of treatment/last check-up.

RESULTS

A total of 180 patients were included: GA cohort n = 120, non-GA cohort n = 60. Patients in the GA cohort showed better EDSS scores at the end of treatment/last check-up (mean ± SD, 2.8 ± 1.8 vs. 3.9 ± 2.2; P = 0.001) and were 1.65 times more likely to show better EDSS scores compared to the non-GA cohort (odds ratio, 0.606; 95%CI, 0.436-0.843; P = 0.003). Patients in the GA cohort showed longer mean time to reach EDSS scores of 6 (209.1 [95%CI, 187.6-230.6] vs. 164.3 [95% CI, 137.0-191.6] months; P = 0.004) and slower disability progression (hazard ratio, 0.415 [95%CI, 0.286-0.603]; P < 0.001). The annualized relapse rate was lower in the GA cohort (mean ± SD, 0.5 ± 0.5 vs. 0.8 ± 0.5; P = 0.001) and patients' quality of life was improved in this study cohort compared to the non-GA cohort (mean ± SD, 0.7 ± 0.1 vs. 0.6 ± 0.2; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

GA may slow down the progression of EDSS scores to a greater extent than other MS therapies, as well as achieving a greater reduction in relapses and a greater improvement in patients' quality of life. Switching from GA to other MS therapies has not proved to entail a better response to treatment.

Outcomes of switching directly to oral fingolimod from injectable therapies: Results of the randomized, open-label, multicenter, Evaluate Patient OutComes (EPOC) study in relapsing multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

The Evaluate Patient OutComes (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01216072) study was conducted in North America to assess patient- and physician-reported treatment satisfaction in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) who received oral fingolimod for 6 months after switching from an injectable disease-modifying therapy (iDMT), without an intervening washout.

METHODS

In this open-label, multicenter study, patients were randomized 3:1 to once-daily fingolimod 0.5mg or iDMT. The primary study objective was to evaluate differences in satisfaction measured using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication v1.4.

RESULTS

Of 1053 patients randomized, 790 patients received fingolimod and 263 patients received iDMT. Treatment satisfaction improved significantly in patients who switched to fingolimod compared with those who continued iDMT. Patients also reported significant improvements in health-related quality of life, reduced depression, and reduced fatigue severity after a switch to fingolimod. No difference between the treatment groups was detected on the Patient Reported Indices for MS Activities scale. The safety profile of fingolimod was consistent with that reported in the pivotal phase 3 studies. The most commonly reported adverse events were more prevalent in patients who switched to fingolimod than in those who continued iDMT (headache: 12% vs 3%; fatigue: 12% vs 6%). No significant relationship between lymphocyte counts and infection rates was observed and there was no evidence of additive immune-system effects, which might be expected when switching to a different class of immunomodulatory therapy with no intervening washout.

CONCLUSION

Patients who switched from iDMT to fingolimod had significant improvements in most self-reported outcomes compared with those who continued iDMT.

Immunological mechanism of action and clinical profile of disease-modifying treatments in multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a life-long, potentially debilitating disease of the central nervous system (CNS). MS is considered to be an immune-mediated disease, and the presence of autoreactive peripheral lymphocytes in CNS compartments is believed to be critical in the process of demyelination and tissue damage in MS. Although MS is not currently a curable disease, several disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are now available, or are in development. These DMTs are all thought to primarily suppress autoimmune activity within the CNS. Each therapy has its own mechanism of action (MoA) and, as a consequence, each has a different efficacy and safety profile. Neurologists can now select therapies on a more individual, patient-tailored basis, with the aim of maximizing potential for long-term efficacy without interruptions in treatment. The MoA and clinical profile of MS therapies are important considerations when making that choice or when switching therapies due to suboptimal disease response. This article therefore reviews the known and putative immunological MoAs alongside a summary of the clinical profile of therapies approved for relapsing forms of MS, and those in late-stage development, based on published data from pivotal randomized, controlled trials.

Risk-benefit considerations in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

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.