An open-label trial of combination therapy with interferon beta-1a and oral methotrexate in MS

Therapeutic consequences in patients with both inflammatory rheumatic diseases and multiple sclerosis

Dealing with patients with both multiple sclerosis (MS) and inflammatory rheumatic disorders (IRDs) is not uncommon for a rheumatologist, as there is a statistical association between SpA and MS. As several CNS demyelinating events have been reported in patients treated with TNF inhibitor (TNFi), the pre-existing demyelinating disease was considered a contraindication for TNFi. However, this contraindication is mainly based on a randomized controlled trial in MS and not on large epidemiological studies. According to the last epidemiological studies, TNFi might not be an inducer of MS. Moreover, there are no clear recommendations on the use of the other DMARDs in patients suffering from an IRD and MS. In this review, we summarize the link between MS and IRDs and the impact of DMARDs on MS, especially TNFi. We also look at the impact of disease-modifying drugs for adults with MS and IRDs.

Antidrug Antibodies Against Biological Treatments for Multiple Sclerosis

The development of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) is a major problem in several recombinant protein therapies used in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). The etiology of ADAs is multifaceted. The predisposition for a breakdown of immune tolerance is probably genetically determined, and many factors may contribute to the immunogenicity, including structural properties, formation of aggregates, and presence of contaminants and impurities from the industrial manufacturing process. ADAs may have a neutralizing capacity and can reduce or abrogate the bioactivity and therapeutic efficacy of the drug and cause safety issues. Interferon (IFN)-β was the first drug approved for the treatment of MS, and-although it is generally recognized that neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) appear and potentially have a negative effect on therapeutic efficacy-the use of routine measurements of NAbs and the interpretation of the presence of NAbs has been debated at length. NAbs appear after 9-18 months of therapy in up to 40% of patients treated with IFNβ, and the frequency and titers of NAbs depend on the IFNβ preparation. Although all pivotal clinical trials of approved IFNβ products in MS exhibited a detrimental effect of NAbs after prolonged therapy, some subsequent studies did not observe clinical effects from NAbs, which led to the claim that NAbs did not matter. However, it is now largely agreed that persistently high titers of NAbs indicate an abrogation of the biological response and, hence, an absence of therapeutic efficacy, and this observation should lead to a change of therapy. Low and medium titers are ambiguous, and treatment decisions should be guided by determination of in vivo messenger RNA myxovirus resistance protein A induction after IFNβ administration and clinical disease activity. During treatment with glatiramer acetate, ADAs occur frequently but do not appear to adversely affect treatment efficacy or result in adverse events. ADAs occur in approximately 5% of patients treated with natalizumab within 6 months of therapy, and persistent NAbs are associated with a lack of efficacy and acute infusion-related reactions and should instigate a change of therapy. When using the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies ocrelizumab and ofatumumab in the treatment of MS, it is not necessary to test for NAbs as these occur very infrequently. Alemtuzumab is immunogenic, but routine measurements of ADAs are not recommended as the antibodies in the pivotal 2-year trials at the population level did not influence lymphocyte depletion or repopulation, efficacy, or safety. However, in some individuals, NAbs led to poor lymphocyte depletion.

Combined Therapy of Vitamin D3-Tolerogenic Dendritic Cells and Interferon-β in a Preclinical Model of Multiple Sclerosis

Autologous antigen-specific therapies based on tolerogenic dendritic cells (tolDC) offer the possibility to treat autoimmune diseases by restoring homeostasis and targeting specifically autoreactive responses. Here, we explore the hypothesis that systemic inflammation occurring in autoimmune diseases, such as multiple sclerosis (MS), can generate a disease-specific environment able to alter the functionality of tolDC. In this context in fact, a combined therapy of tolDC with an immunomodulatory treatment could potentiate the beneficial effect of this antigen-specific cell therapy. For this purpose, we analyzed the efficacy of a combined therapy based on the use of vitamin D3 (VitD3)-tolDC plus interferon beta (IFN-beta) in MS. VitD3-tolDC were generated from healthy donors and MS patients and co-cultured with allogeneic peripheral blood mononuclear cells, in the presence or absence of IFN-beta. In vitro, VitD3-tolDC treatment reduced the percentage of activated T cells and allogeneic proliferation, whereas VitD3-tolDC+IFN-beta treatment enhanced the suppressive ability of VitD3-tolDC and, additionally, induced a shift towards a Th2 profile. To determine the clinical benefit of the combined therapy, C57BL/6-experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE)-induced mice were treated with antigen-specific VitD3-tolDC and/or IFN-beta. Treatment of EAE mice with combined therapy ameliorated the disease course compared to each monotherapy. These results suggest that a combined therapy based on antigen-specific VitD3-tolDC and IFN-beta may represent a promising strategy for MS patients.

Overview of Dual-Acting Drug Methotrexate in Different Neurological Diseases, Autoimmune Pathologies and Cancers

Methotrexate, a structural analogue of folic acid, is one of the most effective and extensively used drugs for treating many kinds of cancer or severe and resistant forms of autoimmune diseases. In this paper, we take an overview of the present state of knowledge with regards to complex mechanisms of methotrexate action and its applications as immunosuppressive drug or chemotherapeutic agent in oncological combination therapy. In addition, the issue of the potential benefits of methotrexate in the development of neurological disorders in Alzheimer’s disease or myasthenia gravis will be discussed.

Safety of long-term intrathecal methotrexate in progressive forms of MS

Background

There are few treatment options for multiple sclerosis (MS) patients with advanced disability [expanded disability status scale (EDSS) ⩾ 6.0]. In 2010, we reported initial results of using intrathecal methotrexate (ITMTX) in patients with progressive MS. We now report on long-term use of ITMTX. We performed a retrospective chart analysis of patients who have had 18 or more treatments to establish the ongoing safety and tolerability of ITMTX. Thus, the objective of this study was to establish the safety and tolerability of long-term therapy with (ITMTX) in patients with treatment-resistant, progressive forms of MS.

Methods

We studied 83 patients (67 secondary and 16 primary progressive) who received ITMTX 12.5 mg every 8-11 weeks for 3-10 years (range: 18-57 treatments). All patients were evaluated neurologically, and their EDSS was assessed at every treatment. In addition, all adverse events, frequency of infections, and any hospitalizations, were noted.

Results

There were no deaths, hospitalizations, or other serious adverse effects related to ITMTX. Headaches occurred at least once in 12% of patients, and transient fatigue occurred in 53% of patients. As determined by EDSS, there was no significant change from baseline status to post-treatment scores in both primary progressive MS (PPMS) and secondary progressive (SPMS) patients.

Conclusions

Pulsed ITMTX was well tolerated for up to 10 years in PPMS patients with no serious adverse effects. Although this was an open-label, retrospective analysis, and efficacy could not be studied, there was evidence of disease stabilization in many patients receiving ITMTX. It appears that long-term ITMTX is a safe therapeutic option in advanced progressive MS.

A narrative review of psoriasis and multiple sclerosis: links and risks

The association of psoriasis (PsO) with other autoimmune and autoinflammatory diseases has long been a topic of interest. Although previous studies have attempted to clarify the specific relationship between PsO and multiple sclerosis (MS), it remains obscure, with limited and conflicting evidence regarding a link between the two entities. Herein, we review the etiology, pathogenesis, and treatment of each disease and present the available literature to-date regarding a possible relationship between PsO and MS. We conclude that further study is necessary to discern whether there may be a significant relationship between PsO and MS. In the meantime, clinicians may find it appropriate to screen for MS in patients with PsO, allowing for timely referral to a neurologist should it be necessary.

Multiple Sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease of the central nervous system (CNS) characterized by loss of motor and sensory function that results from immune-mediated inflammation, demyelination, and subsequent axonal damage.

Clinically, most MS patients experience recurrent episodes (relapses) of neurological impairment, but in most cases (60–80%) the course of the disease eventually becomes chronic and progressive, leading to cumulative motor, sensory, and visual disability, and cognitive deficits.

The course of the disease is largely unpredictable and its clinical presentation is variable, but its predilection for certain parts of the CNS, which includes the optic nerves, the brain stem, cerebellum, and cervical spinal cord, provides a characteristic constellation of signs and symptoms. Several variants of MS have been nowadays defined with variable immunopathogenesis, course and prognosis. Many new treatments targeting the immune system have shown efficacy in preventing the relapses of MS and have been introduced to its management during the last decade.

Effects of Interferon Beta, Cyclophosphamide and Azathioprine on Cytokine Profile in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis

We assessed the in vitro effects of interferon beta-1b (IFNβ-1b), cyclophosphamide (CY), and azathioprine (AZA) alone and of the combination of IFNβ-1b with CY or AZA on the production of Th1 and Th2 cytokines in 10 patients with multiple sclerosis. Cytokine levels were determined at baseline and after stimulation with IFNβ-1b, CY, and AZA alone or with the combination of IFNβ-1b with CY or AZA. The combination of IFNβ-1b with CY resulted in a statistically significant decrease in the production of interleukin-2 (IL-2) (P=0.003) and tumor necrosis factor alfa (TNF-α) (P=0.03). An additive effect on the production of interferon gamma (IFN-γ) (P=0.2) and interleukin-10 (IL-10) (P=0.6), and a positive interaction on the production of interleukin-4 (IL-4) (P=0.08) were observed although the findings were not statistically significant. The combination of IFNβ-1b with AZA resulted in a significant negative effect on the production of IL-2 (P=0.006), whereas TNF-α (P=0.02), IFN-γ (P=0.03), IL-4 (P=0.2), and IL-10 (P=0.3) were not statistically impacted. Our data show that CY was able to improve the effects of IFNβ-1b on the ratio of Th1/Th2 cytokines.

Fludarabine add-on therapy in interferon-beta-treated patients with multiple sclerosis experiencing breakthrough disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) may experience breakthrough disease despite effective interferon beta (IFNβ) therapy. Fludarabine (FLU) is a chemotherapeutic agent used in lymphoproliferative disorders that may be synergistic when combined with immunomodulatory therapy to control active multiple sclerosis (MS).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to explore the safety and tolerability of FLU versus monthly methylprednisolone (MP) in IFNβ-treated RRMS patients with breakthrough disease. Clinical and MRI effects of IFNβ-1a plus FLU were evaluated.

METHODS

Eighteen patients with breakthrough disease [⩾2 relapses over the prior year and ⩾1.0-point increase in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score sustained for ⩾3 months] after >1 year of IFNβ therapy were enrolled in this prospective, open-label, randomized, proof-of-concept, pilot study. Patients received intravenous (IV) MP 1 g daily for 3 days and then were randomized to receive 3 monthly IV infusions of FLU 25 mg/m(2) daily for 5 consecutive days (n = 10) or MP 1 g (n = 8). All patients maintained their intramuscular IFNβ-1a treatment throughout the study. Analyses explored safety signals and directional trends; this preliminary study was not powered to detect clinically meaningful differences.

RESULTS

Both combination treatments were safe and well tolerated, with all adverse events mild. Patients treated with IFNβ-1a plus FLU had similar relapse rates, EDSS scores, and MS Functional Composite scores, but significantly less acute corticosteroid use for on-study relapses and better responses on some MRI outcomes, versus patients treated with IFNβ-1a plus MP.

CONCLUSIONS

Further study of FLU for breakthrough disease in patients with RRMS is warranted.

Neuroprotective dimethyl fumarate synergizes with immunomodulatory interferon beta to provide enhanced axon protection in autoimmune neuroinflammation

INTRODUCTION

Despite recent advances in development of treatments for multiple sclerosis, there is still an unmet need for more effective and also safe therapies. Based on the modes of action of interferon-beta (IFN-β) and dimethyl fumarate (DMF), we hypothesized that anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effects may synergize in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE).

METHODS

EAE was induced in C57BL/6 mice by immunization with MOG35-55-peptide. Murine IFN-β was injected s.c. every other day at 10.000IU, and DMF was provided at 15mg/kg by oral gavage twice daily. Control mice received PBS injections and were treated by oral gavage with the vehicle methylcellulose. Mice were scored daily by blinded observers and histological, FACS and cytokine studies were performed to further elucidate the underlying mechanism of action.

RESULTS

Combination therapy significantly ameliorated EAE disease course in comparison to controls and monotherapy with IFN-β. Histological analyses showed a significant effect on axon preservation with almost twice as much axons present in inflamed lesions as compared to control. Remarkably, the effect on axonal preservation was more pronounced under combination therapy than with both monotherapies. Neither monotherapy nor combination therapy demonstrated modulation of cytokines and frequency of antigen presenting cells.

DISCUSSION

Combination of IFN-β and DMF resulted in greater beneficial effects with improved tissue protection as compared to the respective monotherapies. Further combination studies of these safe therapies in human disease are warranted.

Immunopathogenesis and immunotherapeutic approaches in multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis is an organ-specific autoimmune disease, characterized pathologically by cell-mediated inflammation, demyelination and variable degrees of axonal loss. Although inflammation is considered central to the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis, to date, the only licensed and hence widely used multiple sclerosis immunotherapies are interferon-beta, glatiramer acetate and mitoxantrone. This review discusses the immunopathogenesis of multiple sclerosis, focusing on a number of emerging immunotherapies. A number of new approaches likely to manipulate the immunopathogenesis of multiple sclerosis and which may ultimately allow for the development of more effective immunotherapy are also highlighted.

Immunotherapy of multiple sclerosis: the state of the art

It is widely accepted that the main common pathogenetic pathway in multiple sclerosis (MS) involves an immune-mediated cascade initiated in the peripheral immune system and targeting CNS myelin. Logically, therefore, the therapeutic approaches to the disease include modalities aiming at downregulation of the various immune elements that are involved in this immunologic cascade. Since the introduction of interferons in 1993, which were the first registered treatments for MS, huge steps have been made in the field of MS immunotherapy. More efficious and specific immunoactive drugs have been introduced and it appears that the increased specificity for MS of these new treatments is paralleled by greater efficacy. Unfortunately, this seemingly increased efficacy has been accompanied by more safety issues. The immunotherapeutic modalities can be divided into two main groups: those affecting the acute stages (relapses) of the disease and the long-term treatments that are aimed at preventing the appearance of relapses and the progression in disability. Immunomodulating treatments may also be classified according to the level of the 'immune axis' where they exert their main effect. Since, in MS, a neurodegenerative process runs in parallel and as a consequence of inflammation, early immune intervention is warranted to prevent progression of relapses of MS and the accumulation of disability. The use of neuroimaging (MRI) techniques that allow the detection of silent inflammatory activity of MS and neurodegeneration has provided an important tool for the substantiation of the clinical efficacy of treatments and the early diagnosis of MS. This review summarizes in detail the existing information on all the available immunotherapies for MS, old and new, classifies them according to their immunologic mechanisms of action and proposes a structured algorithm/therapeutic scheme for the management of the disease.

Role of immunosuppressive therapy for the treatment of multiple sclerosis

Immunosuppressives have been used in multiple sclerosis (MS) since 1966. Today, we have many treatments for the relapsing forms of the disease, including 8 US Food and Drug Administration-approved therapies, with more soon to be introduced. Given the current treatment landscape what place do immunosuppressants have in combating MS? Trial work and our experience suggest that immunosuppressives still have an important role in treating MS. Cyclophosphamide finds use in treating patients with severe, inflammatory relapsing remitting MS or those suffering from a fulminant attack. We tend to employ mycophenolate mofetil as an add-on to injectable therapy for patients experiencing breakthrough activity. Some progressive (primary progressive multiple sclerosis or secondary progressive multiple sclerosis) patients may stabilize after treatment with either cyclophosphamide or mycophenolate. We rarely employ mitoxantrone because of potential cardiac or carcinogenic effects. We prefer to use cyclophosphamide or mycophenolate mofetil in preference to methotrexate because evidence of efficacy is limited for this drug. We have less experience with azathioprine, but it may be an alternative for patients with limited options who are unable to tolerate conventional therapies.

Neutralizing antibodies against interferon-Beta

The development of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) is a major problem in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients treated with interferon-beta (IFN-ß). Whereas binding antibodies (BAbs) can be demonstrated in the vast majority of patients, only a smaller proportion of patients develop NAbs. The principle in NAb in vitro assays is the utilization of cultured cell lines that are responsive to IFN-ß. The cytopathic effect (CPE) assay measures the capacity of NAbs to neutralize IFN- ß's protective effect on cells challenged with virus and the MxA induction assay measures the ability of NAbs to reduce the IFN-ß-induced expression of MxA, either at the mRNA or the protein level. A titer of >20 neutralizing units/ml traditionally defines NAb posi-tivity. NAbs in high titers completely abrogate the in vivo response to IFN-ß, whereas the effect of low and intermediate titers is unpredictable. As clinically important NAbs appear only after 9-18 months IFN- ß0 therapy, short-term studies of two years or less are unsuitable for evaluation of clinical NAb effects. All long-term trials of three years or more concordantly show evidence of a detrimental effect of NAbs on relapses, disease activity on MRI, or on disease progression. Persistent high titers of NAbs indicate an abrogation of the biological response and, hence, absence of therapeutic efficacy, and this observation should lead to a change of therapy. As low and medium titers are ambiguous treatment decisions in patients with low NAb titres should be guided by determination of in vivo mRNA MxA induction and clinical disease activity.

Disease-modifying agents in multiple sclerosis

Since 1993, six disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis (MS) have been proven to be of benefit in rigorous phase III clinical trials. Other agents are also available and are used to treat MS, but definitive data on their efficacy is lacking. Currently, disease-modifying therapy is used for relapsing forms of MS. This includes clinically isolated syndrome/first-attack high-risk patients, relapsing patients, secondary progressive patients who are still experiencing relapses, and progressive relapsing patients. The choice of agent depends upon drug factors (including affordability, availability, convenience, efficacy, and side effects), disease factors (including clinical and neuroimaging prognostic indicators), and patient factors (including comorbidities, lifestyle, and personal preference). This review will discuss the disease-modifying agents used currently in MS, as well as available alternative agents.

Therapeutic approaches to multiple sclerosis: an update on failed, interrupted, or inconclusive trials of immunomodulatory treatment strategies

Multiple sclerosis (MS) continues to be a therapeutic challenge, and much effort is being made to develop new and more effective immune therapies. Particularly in the past decade, neuroimmunologic research has delivered new and highly effective therapeutic options, as seen in the growing number of immunotherapeutic agents and biologics in development. However, numerous promising clinical trials have failed to show efficacy or have had to be halted prematurely because of unexpected adverse events. Some others have shown results that are of unknown significance with regard to a reliable assessment of true efficacy versus safety. For example, studies of the highly innovative monoclonal antibodies that selectively target immunologic effector molecules have not only revealed the impressive efficacy of such treatments, they have also raised serious concerns about the safety profiles of these antibodies. These results add a new dimension to the estimation of risk-benefit ratios regarding acute or long-term adverse effects. Therapeutic approaches that have previously failed in MS have indicated that there are discrepancies between theoretical expectations and practical outcomes of different compounds. Learning from these defeats helps to optimize future study designs and to reduce the risks to patients. This review summarizes trials on MS treatments since 2001 that failed or were interrupted, attempts to analyze the underlying reasons for failure, and discusses the implications for our current view of MS pathogenesis, clinical practice, and design of future studies. In order to maintain clarity, this review focuses on anti-inflammatory therapies and does not include studies on already approved and effective disease-modifying therapies, albeit used in distinct administration routes or under different paradigms. Neuroprotective and alternative treatment strategies are presented elsewhere.

Recognizing and treating suboptimally controlled multiple sclerosis: steps toward regaining command

OBJECTIVE

The therapies available today for multiple sclerosis (MS) reduce but do not fully control disease activity. The objective of this article is to review the definitions of and treatments for suboptimally controlled MS and highlight the challenges faced by clinicians to increase awareness of recognizing and managing patients with suboptimally controlled MS.

METHODS

Published literature describing treatment failure, treatment optimization paradigms or algorithms, clinical studies of therapies in patients with suboptimally controlled MS, or case reports of management of patients with suboptimally controlled MS were identified from searches of EMBASE and MEDLINE. This was supplemented with case reports and discussions from an expert panel meeting of MS specialists focused on the diagnosis and treatment of suboptimally controlled MS.

RESULTS

Several groups have created recommendations for evaluating suboptimal response to disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) in MS. Currently no robust evidence-based data exist to guide treatment decisions in patients who have suboptimal response to a particular therapy. In the absence of data, several treatment paradigms for suboptimally controlled MS have been proposed using a step therapy or platform therapy approach. Therapy modifications require consideration of disease- and patient-specific factors while accounting for the risk-benefit profile of the agent(s). Unapproved drugs and combination therapies should be reserved as agents of last resort because of the experimental nature of these treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of evidence-based data, identifying and treating MS patients with suboptimal response to the available platform therapies remains challenging. Developing algorithms able to quantify breakthrough disease activity and suboptimal response to DMDs in individual MS patients remains an important target for the MS community. Consideration should be given for all reasons why a particular DMD may not be working for a given patient and for the use of an individualized step therapy.

Novel therapeutic strategies for multiple sclerosis--a multifaceted adversary

Therapeutic strategies for multiple sclerosis have radically changed in the past 15 years. Five regulatory-approved immunomodulatory agents are reasonably effective in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, and appear to delay the time to progression to disabling stages. Inhibiting disease progression remains the central challenge for the development of improved therapies. As understanding of the immunopathogenesis of multiple sclerosis has advanced, a number of novel potential therapeutics have been identified, and are discussed here. It has also become apparent that traditional views of multiple sclerosis simply as a CD4+ T-cell-mediated disease of the central nervous system are incomplete. The pathogenic role of other immune components such as the innate immune system, regulatory T cells, T helper 17 cells and B cells is reaching centre stage, opening up exciting avenues and novel potential targets to affect the natural course of multiple sclerosis.

Basic and escalating immunomodulatory treatments in multiple sclerosis: current therapeutic recommendations

This review updates and extends earlier Consensus Reports related to current basic and escalating immunomodulatory treatments in multiple sclerosis (MS). The recent literature has been extracted for new evidence from randomized controlled trials, open treatment studies and reported expert opinion, both in original articles and reviews, and evaluates indications and safety issues based on published data. After data extraction from published full length publications and critically weighing the evidence and potential impact of the data, the review has been drafted and circulated within the National MS Societies and the European MS Platform to reach consensus within a very large group of European experts, combining evidence-based criteria and expert opinion where evidence is still incomplete. The review also outlines a few areas of controversy and delineates the need for future research.

Avonex Combination Trial in relapsing—remitting MS: rationale, design and baseline data

Objective To review the rationale, design and baseline data of the Avonex Combination Trial (ACT), an investigator-run study of intramuscular interferon beta-1a (IM IFNβ-1a) combined with methotrexate (MTX) and/or IV methylprednisolone (IVMP) in relapsing—remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients with continued disease activity on IM IFNβ-1a monotherapy.

Methods Eligibility criteria included RRMS, Expanded Disability Status Scale score 0—5.5, and ≥1 relapse or gadolinium-enhancing MRI lesion in the prior year while on IM IFNβ-1a monotherapy. Subjects continued IFNβ-1a 30 mcg IM weekly and were randomized in a 2 × 2 factorial design to adjunctive weekly placebo or MTX 20 mg PO, with or without IVMP 1000 mg/day for three days every other month. ACT was industry-supported, and collaboratively designed and governed by an Investigator Steering Committee with independent Advisory and Data Safety Monitoring Committees. Study operations, MRI analysis and aggregated data were managed by the Cleveland Clinic MS Academic Coordinating Center.

Results In total 313 subjects were enrolled with clinical and MRI characteristics typical of RRMS. Most subjects (86.9%) qualified with a clinical relapse, with or without an enhancing MRI lesion, in the preceding year. At baseline, 21.4% had enhancing lesions, and 5.1% had anti-IFNβ neutralizing antibodies. ACT's management and operational structures functioned well.

Conclusion This study provides an innovative model for academic—industry collaborative MS research and will enhance understanding of the utility of combination therapy for RRMS patients with continued disease activity on an established first-line treatment. Multiple Sclerosis 2008; 14: 370—382. http://msj.sagepub.com

Oral disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis: the story so far

Multiple sclerosis (MS) represents the prototypic inflammatory autoimmune disorder of the CNS. It is the most common cause of neurological disability in young adults and exhibits considerable clinical, radiological and pathological heterogeneity. Increased understanding of the immunopathological processes underlying this disease, advances in biotechnology and the development of powerful magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technologies, together with improvements in clinical trial design, have led to a variety of valuable therapeutic approaches to MS. Therapy for MS has changed dramatically over the past decade, yielding significant progress in the treatment of relapsing remitting and secondary progressive forms; however, most of the clinically relevant therapeutic approaches are not yet available as oral formulations. A substantial number of preliminary and pivotal reports have provided promising results for oral therapies, and various phase III clinical trials are currently being initiated or are already underway evaluating the efficacy of a variety of orally administered agents, including cladribine, teriflunomide, laquinimod, fingolimod and fumaric acid. It is hoped that these trials will advance the development of oral therapies for MS.

Using measurements of neutralizing antibodies: the challenge of IFN-? therapy

Although the occurrence of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) to interferon (IFN)-beta has been acknowledged since the pivotal trials of IFN-beta in multiple sclerosis (MS), the effect of these antibodies has for several reasons been debated. The main reason for the controversies has been insufficient knowledge of the fact that clinically relevant NAbs do not appear until 12-18 months after initiation of IFN-beta therapy which make studies of 2 years or less unsuited to assess the clinical relevance of NAbs. Further, changes in NAb affinity occur and contribute to increase NAb effects by time. The present paper reviews our current knowledge of NAbs and stresses the importance of using measurements of NAbs routinely. It is concluded that NAb titres are important for the biological response to IFN-beta. Patients with low or intermediate titres may have preserved a full or partial biological response and might still benefit from IFN-beta therapy. However, persistent high titres of NAbs indicate an abrogation of the biological response and, hence, absence of therapeutic efficacy, and this observation should lead to a change of therapy. The application of the existing information about NAbs in clinical practice would lead to improved efficacy of IFN-beta treatment for the benefit of patients with MS.

Combination therapy in multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis is an inflammatory/demyelinating and neurodegenerative disease. Treatment of MS is currently based on various different therapeutic algorithms of a sequential or escalating therapy with immunomodulators or immunosuppressants, generated partly from evidence based medicine and partly from expert's consensus. However, these therapies are not always effective as monotherapies. An alternative would be the combination of agents which already have some proven efficacy in MS therapy, are directed against different mechanisms of the pathogenic chain, and ideally result in synergic effects and a profile of reduced toxicity. Combination therapy in multiple sclerosis can be: Combination of two or more anti-inflammatory agents or combination of anti-inflammatory agents plus neuroprotective agents. Many combinations of drugs have been or are being tested in multiple sclerosis. Clinical trials have included a low number of patients for short periods of time. Preliminary studies on safety suggest that some combination therapies might be safe and efficacious. Ongoing and new phase III clinical trials involving a greater number of patients for longer periods of time are needed to verify this hypothesis. A wise balance between efficacy and safety and extremely clear information to patients should drive clinical decisions.

Combination therapy for the treatment of multiple sclerosis: challenges and opportunities

OBJECTIVE

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a complex, heterogeneous disease. Standard treatment of relapsing MS includes interferon beta (IFNbeta) and glatiramer acetate. These agents reduce relapse rates, and IFNbeta-1a is associated with a slowing of disease progression. Despite treatment, many patients experience disease progression, prompting neurologists to use combination therapies to delay this progression. Agents that may be considered for combination therapy are those with unique mechanisms of action that exert additive or synergistic efficacy. This article reviews combination treatment with immunosuppressive therapies and new agents for the management of MS.

METHODS

The Medline and EMBASE databases were searched for clinical trials using the following search terms: multiple sclerosis, interferon, Avonex, Betaseron, Rebif, glatiramer, copolymer 1, Copaxone, immunosuppressant, cytotoxic, corticosteroid, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, mitoxantrone, natalizumab, combination therapy. The National MS Society website was searched for clinical trials of combination therapies.

RESULTS

Several small studies have analyzed the effects of immunosuppressive therapy added to IFNbeta treatment, and some encouraging results have been obtained. Few data are available on combination therapy with new drug classes; however, current data suggest that combination therapy with new agents is effective. Although the available data on combination regimens are promising, interpretation is limited by lack of controlled study design, small patient population, and short study duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination of standard therapies with immunosuppressive agents or with new therapies may provide synergistic effects that will likely benefit patients with MS. Larger, well-controlled trials need to be conducted.

Combination therapies for multiple sclerosis: scientific rationale, clinical trials, and clinical practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To outline the scientific rationale for combination therapy in multiple sclerosis and to discuss the evidence for combination treatment strategies from animal models and clinical trials of multiple sclerosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Experiments conducted in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis have recently shown beneficial effects of numerous combination therapies. The combination of approved and experimental drugs and two or more experimental agents may positively impact clinical disease activity, inflammation within the central nervous system, and neurorepair. Clinical trials are currently underway to establish the therapeutic efficacy and safety of various combination therapies for multiple sclerosis patients.

SUMMARY

More effective therapies are needed to treat multiple sclerosis. There are good scientific rationales for the use of combination therapy in multiple sclerosis, and the pharmacologic principles for evaluating and understanding their actions are available. The evaluation of specific combination therapies in the controlled setting of clinical trials should be a priority in clinical multiple sclerosis research.

Measuring and management of anti-interferon beta antibodies in subjects with multiple sclerosis

Interferon Beta is well established as a first line agent to treat relapsing remitting Multiple Sclerosis. It frequently induces the formation of neutralising anti-Interferon Beta Antibodies (Nabs) which may abrogate the clinical efficacy of the drug. Numerous studies have shown a loss of bioactivity of the drug in the presence of Nabs. The focus has shifted to reliable quantification of Nabs and their appropriate incorporation into clinical practice. Here we review the development and persistence of Nabs, the effect on Interferon beta bioactivity, clinical and para-clinical autocome measures in trials, Nab assays and discuss management strategies to optimise the use of Interferon beta in relapsing remitting MS.

Synergy between paclitaxel plus an exogenous methyl donor in the suppression of murine demyelinating diseases

Progressive demyelination in multiple sclerosis (MS) reflects the negative balance between myelin damage and repair due to physical and molecular barriers, such as astrocytic glial scars, between oligodendrocytes and target neurons. In this paper, we show that combination therapy with paclitaxel (Taxol) plus the universal methyl-donor, vitamin B12CN (B12CN), dramatically limits progressive demyelination, and enhances remyelination in several independent, immune and nonimmune, in vivo and in vitro model systems. Combination therapy significantly reduced clinical signs of EAE in SJL mice, as well as the spontaneously demyelinating ND4 transgenic mouse. Astrocytosis was normalised in parallel to ultrastructural and biochemical evidence of remyelination. The combination therapy suppressed T cell expansion, reduced IFN-gamma, while enhancing IFN-beta and STAT-1 expression, STAT-1 phosphorylation and methylation of STAT-1 and MBP in the brain. Paclitaxel/B12CN has nearly identical effects to the previously described combination of IFN-beta/ B12CN, whose clinical usefulness is transient because of IFN-neutralising antibodies, not observed (or expected) with the present drug combination. This report provides a mechanistic foundation for the development of a new therapeutic strategy in humans with MS.

Immunmodulatorische Stufentherapie der Multiplen Sklerose

The updated recommendations presented here reflect new developments in the diagnostic work-up and immunotherapy of multiple sclerosis (MS) as well as optimization of medical care for MS patients. Monoclonal antibodies provide considerable improvement of treatment, but their use in basic therapy is restricted by their side effect profile. Thus, for the time being, natalizumab is only approved for monotherapy after basic treatment has failed or for rapidly progressive relapsing-remitting MS. In contrast, long-term data on recombinant beta-interferons and glatiramer acetate (Copaxone) show that even after several years no unexpected side effects occur and that a prolonged therapeutic effect can be assumed which correlates with the dose or frequency of treatment. Recently IFN-beta1b (Betaferon) was approved for prophylactic treatment after the first attack (clinically isolated syndrome, CIS). During treatment with beta-interferons, neutralizing antibodies can emerge with possible loss of effectivity. In contrast, antibodies play no role in treatment with glatiramer acetate. During or after therapy with mitoxantrone, serious side effects (cardiomyopathy, acute myeloid leukemia) appeared in 0.2-0.4% of cases. Plasmapheresis is limited to individual curative attempts in escalating therapy of a severe attack. According to the revised McDonald criteria, the diagnosis of MS can be made as early as the occurrence of the first attack (CIS). Recommendations for optimized care of MS patients are also new, thus implementing a resolution of the European Parliament.

Immunomodulatory effect of combination therapy with lovastatin and 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide-1-beta-D-ribofuranoside alleviates neurodegeneration in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis

Combination therapy with multiple sclerosis (MS) therapeutics is gaining momentum over monotherapy for improving MS. Lovastatin, an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin), was immunomodulatory in an experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) model of MS. Lovastatin biases the immune response from Th1 to a protective Th2 response in EAE by a different mechanism than 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide-1-beta-D-ribofuranoside, an immunomodulating agent that activates AMP-activated protein kinase. Here we tested these agents in combination in an EAE model of MS. Suboptimal doses of these drugs in combination were additive in efficacy against the induction of EAE; clinical symptoms were delayed and severity and duration of disease was reduced. In the central nervous system, the cellular infiltration and proinflammatory immune response was decreased while the anti-inflammatory immune response was increased. Combination treatment biased the class of elicited myelin basic protein antibodies from IgG2a to IgG1 and IgG2b, suggesting a shift from Th1 to Th2 response. In addition, combination therapy lessened inflammation-associated neurodegeneration in the central nervous system of EAE animals. These effects were absent in EAE animals treated with either drug alone at the same dose. Thus, our data suggest that agents with different mechanisms of action such as lovastatin and 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide-1-beta-D-ribofuranoside, when used in combination, could improve therapy for central nervous system demyelinating diseases and provide a rationale for testing them in MS patients.

Diagnosis and management of multiple sclerosis: case studies

Although substantial capabilities have emerged in the ability to globally manage patients who have MS, clinicians continue to be confronted with formidable challenges. Reduction in disease activity and its impact on dis-ability progression remains the central objective of disease-modifying therapy and most current MS research initiatives. Nevertheless, the principal factors that determine the day-to-day limitations on functional capabilities(activities of daily living, work performance, quality of life, and so forth)are a derivative of the pathophysiology of the disease process itself. The substrate for these limitations is inherent in the pathology of demyelination and axonal dysfunction. Identifying measures that can optimize the performance and fidelity of axonal conduction mechanisms may translate into a reduction in MS-related symptoms. Chronic neurologic disease management (with MS representing a signature example) can be optimized when all members of the care team (including patients and their families) collaborate in the co-ordination of interdisciplinary care models that address all aspects of suffering.

Therapeutic effect of vasoactive intestinal peptide on experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis: down-regulation of inflammatory and autoimmune responses

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a disabling inflammatory, autoimmune demyelinating disease of the central nervous system. Despite intensive investigation, the mechanisms of disease pathogenesis remain unclear, and curative therapies are unavailable for MS. The current study describes a possible new strategy for the treatment of MS, based on the administration of the vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP), a well-known immunosuppressive neuropeptide. Treatment with VIP significantly reduced incidence and severity of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), in a MS-related rodent model system. VIP suppressed EAE neuropathology by reducing central nervous system inflammation, including the regulation of a wide spectrum of inflammatory mediators, and by selectively blocking encephalitogenic T-cell reactivity. Importantly, VIP treatment was therapeutically effective in established EAE and prevented the recurrence of the disease. Consequently, VIP represents a novel multistep therapeutic approach for the future treatment of human MS.

Emerging therapies in multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is the most common neurological cause of disability in young people. The disease-modifying treatments, IFN-beta and glatiramer acetate, have been widely available over the last decade and have shown a beneficial effect on relapse rate and magnetic resonance imaging parameters of disease activity; however, their effect on disease progression and disability is modest. Therefore, the search for alternative treatment strategies continues. As understanding of the heterogeneous pathophysiology of MS has increased, emphasis has shifted to more selective therapy that targets components of the inflammatory cascade and the promotion of remyelination and neuroprotection. These agents target the blood-brain barrier, systemic immune dysfunction, local inflammation and neurodegeneration. Combination therapies are being investigated for patients who fail first-line treatments. Many new drugs are being developed and tested that address these issues with the aim of finding a more effective and convenient therapy. These include humanized monoclonal antibodies such as daclizumab (IL-2 antagonist), oral immunomodulators such as sirolimus and statins and neuroprotective agents such as NMDA antagonists and Na+-channel blockers. Many of the treatments discussed in this review are still at early stages of development, but provide exciting potential treatment options; others have proved disappointing in larger extended-phase studies.

Guidelines on use of anti-IFN-beta antibody measurements in multiple sclerosis: report of an EFNS Task Force on IFN-beta antibodies in multiple sclerosis

Therapy-induced binding and neutralizing antibodies is a major problem in interferon (IFN)-beta treatment of multiple sclerosis. The objective of this study was to provide guidelines outlining the methods and clinical use of the measurements of binding and neutralizing antibodies. Systematic search of the Medline database for available publications on binding and neutralizing antibodies was undertaken. Appropriate publications were reviewed by one or more of the task force members. Grading of evidence and recommendations was based on consensus by all task force members. Measurements of binding antibodies are recommended for IFN-beta antibody screening before performing a neutralizing antibody (NAB) assay (Level A recommendation). Measurement of NABs should be performed in specialized laboratories with a validated cytopathic effect assay or MxA production assay using serial dilution of the test sera. The NAB titre should be calculated using the Kawade formula (Level A recommendation). Tests for the presence of NABs should be performed in all patients at 12 and 24 months of therapy (Level A recommendation). In patients who remain NAB-negative during this period measurements of NABs can be discontinued (Level B recommendation). In patient with NABs, measurements should be repeated, and therapy with IFN-beta should be discontinued in patients with high titres of NABs sustained at repeated measurements with 3- to 6-month intervals (Level A recommendation).

Effective combination of minocycline and interferon-β in a model of multiple sclerosis

The objective of the current study was to investigate whether minocycline improves the effect of an existing multiple sclerosis (MS) medication, interferon-beta, on experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) in mice. When used at sub-optimal doses, neither medication affected EAE but their combination at these doses led to the significant alleviation of EAE disease severity scores and histological outcomes. In culture, the toxicity of T cells to neurons was alleviated by their prior exposure to minocycline or interferon-beta and their combination further attenuated neuronal death. Collectively, these results suggest the utility of the combination of minocycline and interferon-beta in MS.

Optimization of the safety and efficacy of interferon beta 1b and azathioprine combination therapy in multiple sclerosis

We conducted an open-label pilot clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding oral azathioprine to the treatment regimen of 15 multiple sclerosis patients breaking through monotherapy with interferon beta-1b. There were no serious adverse events. Gastrointestinal side effects and leukopenia were the most common adverse events and limited dose escalation. There was a 65% reduction in the number of gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions on combination therapy compared to the baseline values (P =0.003). A total WBC count less than 4800/mm3 was the best predictor of MRI response.

Additive effect of the combination of glatiramer acetate and minocycline in a model of MS

There have been significant advances in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) in recent years, but further improvement in therapy is required as not all patients have responded optimally. An approach to enhancing MS treatment is to combine drugs that impact on different aspects of the disease process. We have described that the tetracycline derivative, minocycline, attenuates the severity of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), a model of MS. Here, we have evaluated the combination of minocycline and glatiramer acetate (GA), a current therapy in MS, on the course of EAE in mice. This combination resulted in a significant reduction of disease severity and disease burden with attenuation of the inflammation, axonal loss and demyelination.