Characteristics influencing therapy switch behavior after suboptimal response to first-line treatment in patients with multiple sclerosis

De-escalation of Disease-Modifying Therapy for People with Multiple Sclerosis Due to Safety Considerations: Characterizing 1-Year Outcomes in 25 People Who Switched from Ocrelizumab to Diroximel Fumarate

INTRODUCTION

Switching disease-modifying therapy (DMT) may be considered for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) if a patient's current therapy is no longer optimal. This was particularly important during the recent COVID-19 pandemic because of considerations around immune deficiency and impaired vaccine response associated with B cell-depleting DMTs. This real-world, single-center study aimed to evaluate change or decline in functional ability and overall disease stability in people with RRMS who were switched from B cell-depleting ocrelizumab (OCRE) to diroximel fumarate (DRF) because of safety concern related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Adults with RRMS were included if they had been clinically stable for ≥ 1 year on OCRE. Data collected at baseline and 1 year post switch included relapse rate, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), blood work for assessment of peripheral immune parameters, the Cognitive Assessment Battery (CAB), optical coherence tomography (OCT), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

RESULTS

Participants (N = 25) had a mean (SD) age of 52 (9) years, and a mean (SD) duration of 26 (8) months' treatment with OCRE before the switch to DRF. Median washout duration since the last OCRE infusion was 7 months (range 4-18 months). No participants relapsed on DRF during follow-up, and all remained persistent on DRF after 1 year. There were no significant changes in peripheral immune parameters, other than an increase in the percentage of CD19+ cells 1 year after switching (p < 0.05). Similarly, there were no significant changes in CAB, OCT, and PROs.

CONCLUSION

These preliminary findings suggest that transition to DRF from OCRE may be an effective treatment option for people with RRMS who are clinically stable but may need to switch for reasons unrelated to effectiveness. Longer follow-up times on larger samples are needed to confirm these observations.

Treatment switches of disease-modifying therapies in people with multiple sclerosis: long-term experience from the German MS Registry

Background

The spectrum of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) has expanded over years, but data on treatment strategies is largely lacking. DMT switches are common clinical practice.

Objective

To compare switchers and non-switchers, characterize the first DMT switch and identify reasons and predictors for switching the first DMT.

Methods

Data on 2722 PwMS from the German MS Registry were retrospectively analyzed regarding sociodemographic/clinical differences between 1361 switchers (PwMS discontinuing the first DMT) and non-switchers matched according to age, sex, and observation period. Frequencies of first and second DMTs were calculated and switch reasons identified. Predictors for DMT switches were revealed using univariable and multivariable regression models.

Results

Switchers and non-switchers differed significantly regarding time to first DMT, education, calendar period of the first DMT start (2014-2017 versus 2018-2021), first DMT class used [mild-to-moderate efficacy (MME) versus high-efficacy (HE) DMT], time on first DMT, and disease activity at first DMT start or cessation/last follow-up. The majority of PwMS started with MME DMTs (77.1%), with the most common being glatiramer acetate, dimethyl/diroximel fumarate, and beta-interferon variants. Switchers changed treatment more often to HE DMTs (39.6%), most commonly sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators, anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, and natalizumab. Fewer PwMS switched to MME DMTs (35.9%), with the most common being dimethyl/diroximel fumarate, teriflunomide, or beta-interferon. Among 1045 PwMS with sufficient data (76.8% of 1361 switchers), the most frequent reasons for discontinuing the first DMT were disease activity despite DMT (63.1%), adverse events (17.1%), and patient request (8.3%). Predictors for the first DMT switch were MME DMT as initial treatment [odds ratio (OR) = 2.83 (1.76-4.61), p < 0.001; reference: HE DMT], first DMT initiation between 2014 and 2017 [OR = 11.55 (6.93-19.94), p < 0.001; reference: 2018-2021], and shorter time on first DMT [OR = 0.22 (0.18-0.27), p < 0.001].

Conclusion

The initial use of MME DMTs was among the strongest predictors of DMT discontinuation in a large German retrospective MS cohort, arguing for the need for prospective treatment strategy trials, not only but also on the initial broad use of HE DMTs in PwMS.

Patients with multiple sclerosis choose a collaborative role in making treatment decision: results from the Italian multicenter SWITCH study

BACKGROUND

Clinicians are increasingly recognizing the importance of shared decision-making in complex treatment choices, highlighting the importance of the patient's rationale and motivation for switching therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the association between different modalities of changing multiple sclerosis (MS) treatments, cognitive profile and attitude and preferences of patients concerning treatment choice.

METHODS

This multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted at 28 Italian MS centers in the period between June 2016 and June 2017. We screened all MS patients treated with any DMT, with a treatment compliance of at least 80% of therapy administered during the 3 last months who needed to modify MS therapy because of efficacy, safety or other reasons during a follow-up visit. At the time of switching the symbol digit modalities test (SDMT) and the Control Preference Scale (CPS) were evaluated. According to the CPS, patients were classified as "active" (i.e. who prefer making the medical decision themselves), "collaborative" (i.e. who prefer decisions be made jointly with the physician), or "passive" (i.e. who prefer the physician make the decision).

RESULTS

Out of 13,657 patients recorded in the log, 409 (3%) changed therapy. Of these, 336 (2.5%) patients, 69.6% were female and with mean age 40.6 ± 10.5 years, were enrolled. According to the CPS score evaluation, a significant high percentage of patients (51.1%) were considered collaborative, 74 patients (22.5%) were passive, and 60 (18.2%) patients were active. Stratifying according to CPS results, we found a higher SDMT score among collaborative patients compared to active and passive ones (45.8 ± 12.3 versus 41.0 ± 13.2 versus 41.7 ± 12.8, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this study, the CPS evaluation showed that more than 50% of patients who needed to change therapy chose a "collaborative" role in making treatment decision. Cognitive profile with SDMT seems to correlate with patients' preference on treatment decision, showing better scores in collaborative patients.

Dopaminergic Receptor Targeting in Multiple Sclerosis: Is There Therapeutic Potential?

Dopamine is a neurotransmitter that mediates neuropsychological functions of the central nervous system (CNS). Recent studies have shown the modulatory effect of dopamine on the cells of innate and adaptive immune systems, including Th17 cells, which play a critical role in inflammatory diseases of the CNS. This article reviews the literature data on the role of dopamine in the regulation of neuroinflammation in multiple sclerosis (MS). The influence of dopaminergic receptor targeting on experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) and MS pathogenesis, as well as the therapeutic potential of dopaminergic drugs as add-on pathogenetic therapy of MS, is discussed.

Concordance Between Persons with Multiple Sclerosis and Treating Physician on Medication Effects and Health Status

BACKGROUND

As the number of treatment options for multiple sclerosis (MS) has expanded, alignment between physician and patient on effects of medication has emerged as important for medication persistence/discontinuation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate physician-patient agreement levels on medication effect and health status.

METHODS

Persons with MS (PwMS) (n=71) participated in a cross-sectional study collecting their satisfaction (using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication), intention to dis/continue treatment and global health perception; physicians assessed response to medication and global health status.

RESULTS

Concordance between PwMS' assessment of medication effectiveness and physician's assessment on response to medication, health status and EDSS were r _s= 0.50, r _s= 0.57 and r _s= -0.58, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The significant concordance attests to physician-patient effective communication and may contribute to improved medication adherence.

First line treatment failure: Predictive factors in a cohort of 863 Relapsing Remitting MS patients

BACKGROUND

The advent of new, potent, disease-modifying therapies has dramatically changed the management of multiple sclerosis (MS). Along with these possibilities, it is crucial to better recognize patients who are at risk of first line treatment (FLT) failure and switch to highly effective therapies (HET).

OBJECTIVES

To identify baseline prognostic factors associated with FLT failure in relapsing remitting MS (RR-MS) patients.

METHODS

We included recently diagnosed RR-MS patients starting an FLT identified from 3 French MS centers databases. Baseline characteristics were included in a multivariable Cox analysis to identify the main factors associated with FLT failure.

RESULTS

Eight hundred sixty-three patients were included. We observed an overall rate of treatment failure of 23.5%. The main baseline characteristics associated with treatment failure were age <26 years at treatment start (HR= 2.1, p<0.001), EDSS ≥2 (HR=2.1, p<0.001) and ≥2relapses in the previous year (HR=1.5, p=0.04). The association with the presence of gadolinium enhancement on MRI was not statistically significant. EDSS progression was only significantly associated with age at treatment start and treatment failure.

CONCLUSION

Our series demonstrates that some clinical and imaging factors are associated with treatment failure, and should be considered when planning treatment strategy in patients with recently diagnosed RR-MS.

Multiple modality approach to assess adherence to medications across time in Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Medication adherence is especially challenging in a chronic condition such as Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (RMS). Medication adherence among persons with MS (PwMS) is usually assessed via a single measure, mostly electronic pharmacy records.

OBJECTIVES

Assess medication adherence in multiple modes across time among PwMS; examine consistency across time and associations between measures.

METHODS

PwMS (N = 194) were surveyed prospectively at three time points (baseline, 6 and 12 months later) and their health records and medication claims were retrospectively obtained. Adherence score was based on medication possession ratio (MPR) and two patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Electronic monitoring devices assessing medication adherence were also initiated.

RESULTS

MPR of each nonadherent PwMS, once compared to medical records containing prescription changes, was found as underestimating adherence. MPR was between the two PROs in identifying nonadherence and associations between the measures and across time was moderate (Kappa ranged 0.37-0.42). The use of electronic monitoring devices was not adopted by patients. A score indicated adherence as 66% and 64.9% at Time1 and Time 2, respectively, with 21.1% of PwMS nonadherent at both time points. Adherence did not vary significantly by DMT type.

CONCLUSIONS

Being a dynamic behavior, medication adherence should be repeatedly monitored by using multiple modalities and focused on in clinician-patient encounters, especially in chronic diseases such as MS, which requires long-term treatments. Applying PROs in monitoring medication adherence would facilitate implementation of Participatory Medicine and patient-centered strategies in MS care.

Understanding treatment decisions from the perspective of people with relapsing remitting multiple Sclerosis: A critical interpretive synthesis

BACKGROUND

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory demyelinating disorder of the central nervous system that mainly affects young adults. While there is no cure for MS, disease modifying treatments (DMTs) reduce the relapse rate and partial accrual of disability. More effective DMTs may have higher risks including life-threatening infections or secondary autoimmunity. The complexity and novelty of available treatments cause challenges for clinicians when prescribing treatments and for people with MS (PwMS) when deciding what trade-offs they are willing and ready to make.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the experience of people with relapsing remitting MS (PwRRMS) and their perspectives in choosing treatments.

METHODS

Critical interpretive synthesis was employed to review and synthesis the published literature. Eighty-three publications were selected in a multi-step systematic process.

RESULTS

Findings are presented in four interrelated areas: the influence of the clinical evidence-base in decision making; the meaning of DMT efficacy for PwRRMS; the influence of models of decision-making and information acquisition practices in PwRRMS; and the importance of psychosocial dimensions in DMT decision making. Synthesis of the findings revealed that alongside medical and individual reasoning, contextual circumstances play an important role in making treatment decisions.

CONCLUSION

This review identifies and explains the importance of diverse contextual circumstances (clinical, social, psychological) that are important for PwRRMS when making treatment decisions. The findings demonstrate the importance of eliciting, understanding and addressing such contextual factors.

Assessing 'No Evidence of Disease Activity' Status in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis Receiving Fingolimod in Routine Clinical Practice: A Retrospective Analysis of the Multiple Sclerosis Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Outcomes in the USA (MS-MRIUS) Study

BACKGROUND

'No evidence of disease activity' (NEDA), a composite measure of clinical and magnetic resonance imaging outcomes, provides a comprehensive assessment of disease activity, but is not extensively reported in clinical practice. NEDA-3 is defined as patients with no new/enlarged T2 or gadolinium-enhancing lesions, no relapses, and no disability progression (according to Expanded Disability Status Scale scores). NEDA-4 comprises the components of NEDA-3 and a fourth criterion of ≤ 0.4% annualized brain volume loss.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess NEDA status among patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis receiving fingolimod in clinical practice.

METHODS

Clinical and magnetic resonance imaging data were retrospectively collected from 590 patients who initiated fingolimod at 33 multiple sclerosis centers in the USA. Patients were required to have a magnetic resonance imaging scan in the 6 months before or 1 month after fingolimod initiation (index period) and in the 9-24 months after fingolimod initiation (post-index period). Magnetic resonance imaging data were systematically quantified at a centralized reading facility. The proportions of patients with NEDA-3 or NEDA-4 status during fingolimod treatment were assessed.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period (median: 16 months), data to assess NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 were available for 586 and 325 patients, respectively. In the post-index period, 58.7% of patients achieved NEDA-3 status (no relapses, 85.2%; no new/enlarged T2/gadolinium-enhancing lesions, 76.3%; no disability progression, 87.9%) and 37.2% achieved NEDA-4 status (no relapses, 86.5%; no new/enlarged T2/gadolinium-enhancing lesions, 78.8%; no disability progression, 91.1%; brain volume loss ≤ 0.4, 58.2%).

CONCLUSION

Among patients receiving fingolimod, over half achieved NEDA-3 status and over one-third achieved NEDA-4 status.

Differential glatiramer acetate treatment persistence in treatment-naive patients compared to patients previously treated with interferon

Background

In the treatment of multiple sclerosis, a change of therapy is considered after treatment failure or adverse events. Although disease modifying drugs’ (DMD) efficacy and side effects have been fully analysed in clinical trials, the effects of previous therapy use are less well studied. We aimed to study medication persistence with glatiramer acetate in treatment-naive patients and in patients previously treated with interferon.

Methods

A retrospective study of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients treated with glatiramer acetate in an MS Unit of a Spanish University Hospital (January 2004 – September 2013). Treatment time on glatiramer acetate was studied. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were considered as follows: lack of efficacy, serious adverse event, injection-related side effect, pregnancy and lost to follow-up. Use of prior DMD was registered and analysed. Homogeneity of groups was analysed using Fisher's and Mann-Whitney’s tests. The Kaplan Meier method and Cox regression model were used to estimate time to and risk of treatment discontinuation.

Results

In total, 155 relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients were treated with glatiramer acetate: 100 treatment-naive patients and 55 treated previously with interferon. At the end of the study, 76 patients (49.0 %) continued on glatiramer acetate (with an average treatment time (ATT) of 50.4 months, s.d.32.8) and 50 patients (32.3 %) had switched therapy: 27 patients (17.4 %) for inefficacy (ATT 29.2 months, s.d.17.5), 20 patients (12.9 %) for injection site reactions (ATT 16.5 months, s.d.20.3) and 3 patients (1.9 %) after serious adverse events (ATT 15.7 months, s.d.15.1). ATT in our cohort was 39 months (s.d.30.0), median follow-up 34 months. Six months after glatiramer acetate initiation, probability of persisting on GA was 91.4 %, 82.5 % after 12 months and 72.5 % after 2 years. The risk of glatiramer acetate treatment discontinuation was 2.8 [1.7 – 4.8] times greater for treatment-naive patients than for patients treated previously with interferon and this was hardly modified after adjusting for sex and age.

Conclusions

Glatiramer acetate was safe and useful with low rates of serious adverse events and low rates of break-through disease. Injection intolerance proved a major limitation to glatiramer acetate use. Patients who had been previously treated with interferons presented a lower probability of glatiramer acetate discontinuation than treatment-naive patients.