An argument for broad use of high efficacy treatments in early multiple sclerosis

James M Stankiewicz, Howard L Weiner, James M Stankiewicz, Howard L Weiner

Abstract

Two different treatment paradigms are most often used in multiple sclerosis (MS). An escalation or induction approach is considered when treating a patient early in the disease course. An escalator prioritizes safety, whereas an inducer would favor efficacy. Our understanding of MS pathophysiology has evolved with novel in vivo and in vitro observations. The treatment landscape has also shifted significantly with the approval of over 10 new medications over the past decade alone. Here, we re-examine the treatment approach in light of these recent developments. We believe that recent work suggests that early prediction of the disease course is fraught, the amount of damage to the brain that MS causes is underappreciated, and its impact on patient function oftentimes is underestimated. These concerns, coupled with the recent availability of agents that allow a better therapeutic effect without compromising safety, lead us to believe that initiating higher efficacy treatments early is the best way to achieve the best possible long-term outcomes for people with MS.

Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.

References

    1. Marziniak M, Ghorab K, Kozubski W, et al. . Variations in multiple sclerosis practice within Europe—is it time for a new treatment guideline? Mult Scler Relat Disord 2016;8:35–44.
    1. Rae-Grant A, Day GS, Marrie RA, et al. . Comprehensive systematic review summary: disease-modifying therapies for adults with multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2018;90:789–800.
    1. Montalban X, Gold R, Thompson AJ, et al. . ECTRIMS/EAN Guideline on the pharmacological treatment of people with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2018;24:96–120.
    1. Weinshenker BG, Rice GP, Noseworthy JH, Carriere W, Baskerville J, Ebers GC. The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study: 3. MULTIVARIATE analysis OF predictive FACTORS and MODELS of outcome. Brain 1991;114:1045–1056.
    1. Tremlett H, Paty D, Devonshire V. Disability progression in multiple sclerosis is slower than previously reported. Neurology 2006;66:172–177.
    1. Weinstock-Guttman B, Jacobs LD, Brownscheidle CM, et al. . Multiple sclerosis characteristics in African American patients in the New York state multiple sclerosis consortium. Mult Scler 2003;9:293–298.
    1. Koch M, Uyttenboogaart M, van Harten A, De Keyser J. Factors associated with the risk of secondary progression in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2008;14:799–803. Available at: . Accessed July 24, 2019.
    1. Manouchehrinia A, Zhu F, Piani-Meier D, et al. . Predicting risk of secondary progression in multiple sclerosis: a nomogram. Mult Scler 2019;25:1102–1112.
    1. Trapp BD, Peterson J, Ransohoff RM, Rudick R, Mörk S, Bö L. Axonal transection in the lesions of multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 1998;338: 278–285.
    1. Nielsen AS, Kinkel RP, Madigan N, Tinelli E, Benner T, Mainero C. Contribution of cortical lesion subtypes at 7T MRI to physical and cognitive performance in MS. Neurology 2013;81:641–649.
    1. Kollia K, Maderwald S, Putzki N, et al. . First clinical study on ultra-high-field MR imaging in patients with multiple sclerosis: comparison of 1.5T and 7T. Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:699–702.
    1. Pitt D, Boster A, Pei W, et al. . Imaging cortical lesions in multiple sclerosis with ultra-high-field magnetic resonance imaging. Arch Neurol 2010;67:812–818.
    1. Bermel RA, Bakshi R. The measurement and clinical relevance of brain atrophy in multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2006;5:158–170.
    1. Bodini B, Cercignani M, Khaleeli Z, et al. . Corpus callosum damage predicts disability progression and cognitive dysfunction in primary-progressive MS after five years. Hum Brain Mapp 2013;34:1163–1172.
    1. Inglese M, Madelin G, Oesingmann N, et al. . Brain tissue sodium concentration in multiple sclerosis: a sodium imaging study at 3 tesla. Brain 2010;133:847–857.
    1. Wuerfel J, Paul F, Beierbach B, et al. . MR-elastography reveals degradation of tissue integrity in multiple sclerosis. Neuroimage 2010;49:2520–2525.
    1. Filippi M, Rocca MA. Magnetization transfer magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, spinal cord, and optic nerve. Neurotherapeutics 2007;4:401– 413.
    1. Ranjeva JP, Audoin B, Au Duong MV, et al. . Local tissue damage assessed with statistical mapping analysis of brain magnetization transfer ratio: relationship with functional status of patients in the earliest stage of multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:119–127.
    1. Amato MP, Portaccio E, Stromillo ML, et al. . Cognitive assessment and quantitative magnetic resonance metrics can help to identify benign multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2008;71:632–638.
    1. Tallantyre EC, Major PC, Atherton MJ, et al. . How common is truly benign MS in a UK population? J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2019;90:522–528.
    1. Kister I, Bacon TE, Chamot E, et al. . Natural history of multiple sclerosis symptoms. Int J MS Care 2013;15:146–158.
    1. Salter A, Thomas N, Tyry T, Cutter G, Marrie RA. Employment and absenteeism in working-age persons with multiple sclerosis. J Med Econ 2017;20:493–502.
    1. Kister I, Chamot E, Salter AR, Cutter GR, Bacon TE, Herbert J. Disability in multiple sclerosis: a reference for patients and clinicians. Neurology 2013;80:1018–1024.
    1. Stephen H. Mobility device use in the United States. Disability statistics report 14 MF01/PC03 Plus Postage [online]. Available at: . Accessed August 1, 2019.
    1. Ford C, Goodman AD, Johnson K, et al. . Continuous long-term immunomodulatory therapy in relapsing multiple sclerosis: results from the 15-year analysis of the US prospective open-label study of glatiramer acetate. Mult Scler 2010;16:342–350.
    1. Kappos L, Traboulsee A, Constantinescu C, et al. . Long-term subcutaneous interferon beta-1a therapy in patients with relapsing-remitting MS. Neurology 2006;67:944–953.
    1. Ebers GC, Traboulsee A, Li D, et al. . Analysis of clinical outcomes according to original treatment groups 16 years after the pivotal IFNB-1b trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2010;81:907–912.
    1. Meyer-Moock S, Feng YS, Maeurer M, Dippel FW, Kohlmann T. Systematic literature review and validity evaluation of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) in patients with multiple sclerosis. BMC Neurol 2014;14:58.
    1. Havrdová E, Arnold DL, Bar-Or A, et al. . No evidence of disease activity (NEDA) analysis by epochs in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis treated with ocrelizumab vs interferon beta-1a. Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin 2018;4:2055217318760642.
    1. Havrdova E, Galetta S, Hutchinson M, et al. . Effect of natalizumab on clinical and radiological disease activity in multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of the natalizumab safety and efficacy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (AFFIRM) study. Lancet Neurol 2009;8:254–260.
    1. Hauser SL, Bar-Or A, Comi G, et al. . Ocrelizumab versus interferon beta-1a in relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2017;376:221–234.
    1. Coles AJ, Twyman CL, Arnold DL, et al. . Alemtuzumab for patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis after disease-modifying therapy: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2012;380:1829–1839.
    1. Cohen JA, Coles AJ, Arnold DL, et al. . Alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a as first-line treatment for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2012;380:1819–1828.
    1. Cohen JA, Barkhof F, Comi G, et al. . Oral fingolimod or intramuscular interferon for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med.2010;362:402–415.
    1. Fox RJ, Miller DH, Phillips JT, et al. . Placebo-controlled phase 3 study of oral BG-12 or glatiramer in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1087–1097.
    1. Ho PR, Koendgen H, Campbell N, Haddock B, Richman S, Chang I. Risk of natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in patients with multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of data from four clinical studies. Lancet Neurol 2017;16:925–933.
    1. Zhovtis Ryerson L, Frohman TC, Foley J, et al. . Extended interval dosing of natalizumab in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016;87:885–889.
    1. Berger JR, Malik V, Lacey S, Brunetta P, Lehane PB. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in rituximab-treated rheumatic diseases: a rare event. J Neurovirol 2018;24:323–331.
    1. Barra ME, Soni D, Vo KH, Chitnis T, Stankiewicz JM. Experience with long-term rituximab use in a multiple sclerosis clinic. Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin 2016;2:2055217316672100.
    1. Salzer J, Svenningsson R, Alping P, et al. . Rituximab in multiple sclerosis. A retrospective observational study on safety and efficacy. Neurology 2016;87:2074–2081.
    1. Juanatey A, Blanco-Garcia L, Tellez N. Ocrelizumab: its efficacy and safety in multiple sclerosis [in Spanish]. Rev Neurol 2018;66:423–433. Available at: . Accessed July 24, 2019.
    1. Bottomley C, Lloyd A, Bennett G, Adlard N. A discrete choice experiment to determine UK patient preference for attributes of disease modifying treatments in Multiple Sclerosis. J Med Econ 2017;20:863–870.
    1. Reen GK, Silber E, Langdon DW. Multiple sclerosis patients' understanding and preferences for risks and benefits of disease-modifying drugs: a systematic review. J Neurol Sci 2017;375:107–122.
    1. Halpern R, Agarwal S, Dembek C, Borton L, Lopez-Bresnahan M. Comparison of adherence and persistence among multiple sclerosis patients treated with disease-modifying therapies: a retrospective administrative claims analysis. Patient Prefer Adherence 2011;5:73–84.
    1. Johnson KM, Zhou H, Lin F, Ko JJ, Herrera V. Real-world adherence and persistence to oral disease-modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis patients over 1 year. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2017;23:844–852.
    1. Wang G, Marrie RA, Salter AR, et al. . Health insurance affects the use of disease-modifying therapy in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2016;87:365–374.
    1. Scalfari A, Neuhaus A, Daumer M, Muraro PA, Ebers GC. Onset of secondary progressive phase and long-term evolution of multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2014;85:67–75.
    1. Chalmer TA, Baggesen LM, Nørgaard M, Koch-Henriksen N, Magyari M, Sorensen PS. Early versus later treatment start in multiple sclerosis: a register-based cohort study. Eur J Neurol 2018;25:1262–e110.
    1. Weideman AM, Tapia-Maltos MA, Johnson K, Greenwood M, Bielekova B. Meta-analysis of the age-dependent efficacy of multiple sclerosis treatments. Front Neurol 2017;8:577.
    1. Harding K, Williams O, Willis M, et al. . Clinical outcomes of escalation vs early intensive disease-modifying therapy in patients with multiple sclerosis. JAMA Neurol 2019;76:536–541.
    1. Correale J, Gaitán MI, Ysrraelit MC, Fiol MP. Progressive multiple sclerosis: from pathogenic mechanisms to treatment. Brain 2017;140:527–546.
    1. Krieger SC, Cook K, De Nino S, Fletcher M. The topographical model of multiple sclerosis. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2016;3:e279 .
    1. Keegan BM, Kaufmann TJ, Weinshenker BG, et al. . Progressive motor impairment from a critically located lesion in highly restricted CNS-demyelinating disease. Mult Scler 2018;24:1445–1452.
    1. Confavreux C, Vukusic S, Moreau T, Adeleine P. Relapses and progression of disability in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1430–1438.
    1. Brown JWL, Coles A, Horakova D, et al. . Association of initial disease-modifying therapy with later conversion to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. JAMA 2019;321:175–187.
    1. Cohen M, Maillart E, Tourbah A, et al. . Switching from natalizumab to fingolimod in multiple sclerosis: a French prospective study. JAMA Neurol 2014;71:436–441.
    1. Cree BAC, Gourraud PA, Oksenberg JR, et al. . Long-term evolution of multiple sclerosis disability in the treatment era. Ann Neurol 2016;80:499–510.
    1. Rotstein DL, Healy BC, Malik MT, Chitnis T, Weiner HL. Evaluation of no evidence of disease activity in a 7-year longitudinal multiple sclerosis cohort. JAMA Neurol 2015;72:152–158.
    1. Harel A, Sperling D, Petracca M, et al. . Brain microstructural injury occurs in patients with RRMS despite “no evidence of disease activity”. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2018;89:977–982.
    1. de Flon P, Gunnarsson M, Laurell K, et al. . Reduced inflammation in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis after therapy switch to rituximab. Neurology 2016;87:141–147.
    1. Cantó E, Barro C, Zhao C, et al. . Association between serum neurofilament light chain levels and long-term disease course among patients with multiple sclerosis followed up for 12 years. JAMA Neurol Epub 2019 Aug 12.
    1. Leppert D, Kuhle J. Blood neurofilament light chain at the doorstep of clinical application. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2019;6:e599 .
    1. Burmester GR, Pope JE. Novel treatment strategies in rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet 2017;389:2338–2348.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir