Impact of methodological choices in comparative effectiveness studies: application in natalizumab versus fingolimod comparison among patients with multiple sclerosis

Background

Natalizumab and fingolimod are used as high-efficacy treatments in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Several observational studies comparing these two drugs have shown variable results, using different methods to control treatment indication bias and manage censoring. The objective of this empirical study was to elucidate the impact of methods of causal inference on the results of comparative effectiveness studies.

Methods

Data from three observational multiple sclerosis registries (MSBase, the Danish MS Registry and French OFSEP registry) were combined. Four clinical outcomes were studied. Propensity scores were used to match or weigh the compared groups, allowing for estimating average treatment effect for treated or average treatment effect for the entire population. Analyses were conducted both in intention-to-treat and per-protocol frameworks. The impact of the positivity assumption was also assessed.

Results

Overall, 5,148 relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis patients were included. In this well-powered sample, the 95% confidence intervals of the estimates overlapped widely. Propensity scores weighting and propensity scores matching procedures led to consistent results. Some differences were observed between average treatment effect for the entire population and average treatment effect for treated estimates. Intention-to-treat analyses were more conservative than per-protocol analyses. The most pronounced irregularities in outcomes and propensity scores were introduced by violation of the positivity assumption.

Conclusions

This applied study elucidates the influence of methodological decisions on the results of comparative effectiveness studies of treatments for multiple sclerosis. According to our results, there are no material differences between conclusions obtained with propensity scores matching or propensity scores weighting given that a study is sufficiently powered, models are correctly specified and positivity assumption is fulfilled.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01623-8.

Cost-utility of oral methylprednisolone in the treatment of multiple sclerosis relapses: Results from the COPOUSEP trial

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that oral high-dose methylprednisolone (MP) is non-inferior to intravenous MP in treating multiple sclerosis relapses in terms of effectiveness and tolerance. In order to assist with resource allocation and decision-making, its cost-effectiveness must also be assessed. Our objective was to evaluate the cost-utility of per os high-dose MP as well as the cost-savings associated with implementing the strategy.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis at 28 days was carried out using data from the French COPOUSEP multicenter, double-blind randomized controlled non-inferiority trial and the statutory health insurance reimbursement database. Costs were calculated using a societal perspective, including both direct and indirect costs. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated and bootstrapping methods assessed the uncertainty surrounding the results. An alternative scenario analysis in which MP was administered at home was also carried out. A budgetary impact analysis was carried at five years.

RESULTS

In the conditions of the trial (hospitalized patients), there was no significant difference in utilities and costs at 28 days. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €15,360 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. If multiple sclerosis relapses were treated at home, oral MP would be more effective, less costly and associated with annual savings up to 25 million euros for the French healthcare system.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral MP is cost-effective in the treatment of multiple sclerosis relapses and associated with major savings.

Inaugural tumor-like multiple sclerosis: clinical presentation and medium-term outcome in 87 patients

BACKGROUND

Tumefactive demyelinating lesions of the central nervous system can be the initial presentation in various pathological entities [multiple sclerosis (the most common), Balo's concentric sclerosis, Schilder's disease and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis] with overlapping clinical presentation. The aim of our study was to better characterize these patients.

METHODS

Eighty-seven patients (62 women and 25 men) from different MS centers in France were studied retrospectively. Inclusion criteria were (1) a first clinical event (2) MRI showing one or more large demyelinating lesions (20 mm or more in diameter) with mass-like features. Patients with a previous demyelinating event (i.e. confirmed multiple sclerosis) were excluded.

RESULTS

Mean age at onset was 26 years. The most common initial symptoms (67% of the patients) were hemiparesis or hemiplegia. Aphasia, headache and cognitive disturbances (i.e. atypical symptoms for demyelinating diseases) were observed in 15, 18 and 15% of patients, respectively. The mean largest diameter of the tumefactive lesions was 26.9 mm, with gadolinium enhancement in 66 patients (81%). Twenty-one patients (24%) had a single tumefactive lesion. During follow-up (median time 5.7 years) 4 patients died, 70 patients improved or remained stable and 12 worsened. 86% of patients received initial corticosteroid treatment, and 73% received disease-modifying therapy subsequently. EDSS at the end of the follow-up was 2.4 ± 2.6 (mean ± SD).

CONCLUSION

This study provides further evidence that the clinical course of MS presenting with large focal tumor-like lesions does not differ from that of classical relapsing-remitting MS, once the noisy first relapsing occurred.

Mycophenolate mofetil in multiple sclerosis: a multicentre retrospective study on 344 patients

OBJECTIVES

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is an immunosuppressive agent, sometimes used as a disease-modifying therapy for multiple sclerosis (MS). Several studies have reported the relative safety of this treatment but, to date, its efficacy has rarely been described. We performed a retrospective study to assess the safety and efficacy of MMF in patients with MS.

METHODOLOGY

Three French MS centres included all of their patients treated by MMF. The main outcome criterion was annualised relapse rate (ARR) in the 1 year period after onset of MMF compared with the 1 year control period. Treatment with another immunosuppressive drug, such as mitoxantrone or cyclophosphamide, in the 2 years preceding initiation of MMF was included in a subgroup analysis. MMF safety and progression of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score were also assessed.

RESULTS

344 patients were included; 149 patients were previously treated with another immunosuppressant (IS group). Mean MMF treatment duration was 25.3±1.1 months. During the 1 year control period, ARR was 1.11±0.08, and for the 1 year treatment period, ARR was reduced significantly to 0.35±0.05 (p<0.0001, Wilcoxon paired test). Adverse events (occurring in 11% of patients) were mainly digestive disorders, benign infections, asthenia and transitory lymphopenia. Concerning the progression of disability, in the subgroup of patients without previous immunosuppressant treatment, EDSS remained stable between initiation and 1 year after the beginning of MMF.

INTERPRETATION

Our results suggest that MMF can improve or stabilise MS patients and can be used as an alternative therapy.