User login
VIDEO: Advanced practice providers take on many roles in MS care
SAN DIEGO – A new survey suggests that advanced practice providers who care for multiple sclerosis patients are highly satisfied with their jobs, which encompass a wide range of responsibilities.
Researchers received survey responses from 215 nurse practitioners and 395 physician assistants who answered Web questionnaires in 2016 and 2017. Of those who care for multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, 92.5% and 77.8% respectively said they provide at least 9 of 11 services, such as direct care, supportive services, and care coordination.
“Nurse practitioners in particular are providing lots of different services from diagnosis to education to symptom management,” said Michael T. Halpern, MD, PhD, MPH, of Temple University, Philadelphia. “Physician assistants are also providing a diverse range of MS services, but not as frequently as nurse practitioners.”
Dr. Halpern was the presenting author of the study reporting the survey results. He spoke in a video interview at ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis, where the study findings were presented.
Advanced practice providers also reported high levels of job satisfaction. About 80% in both groups reported being very or extremely satisfied with their careers and with their colleagues; 90% of nurse practitioners reported being very or extremely satisfied by their relationships with patients, as did 86% of physician assistants.
The providers “appear to really enjoy working with individuals with MS,” Dr. Halpern said. But he cautioned that there’s a need for additional training for these providers; some respondents said their lack of knowledge was a hindrance to care.
The study was funded by the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. Dr. Halpern reported no relevant disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – A new survey suggests that advanced practice providers who care for multiple sclerosis patients are highly satisfied with their jobs, which encompass a wide range of responsibilities.
Researchers received survey responses from 215 nurse practitioners and 395 physician assistants who answered Web questionnaires in 2016 and 2017. Of those who care for multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, 92.5% and 77.8% respectively said they provide at least 9 of 11 services, such as direct care, supportive services, and care coordination.
“Nurse practitioners in particular are providing lots of different services from diagnosis to education to symptom management,” said Michael T. Halpern, MD, PhD, MPH, of Temple University, Philadelphia. “Physician assistants are also providing a diverse range of MS services, but not as frequently as nurse practitioners.”
Dr. Halpern was the presenting author of the study reporting the survey results. He spoke in a video interview at ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis, where the study findings were presented.
Advanced practice providers also reported high levels of job satisfaction. About 80% in both groups reported being very or extremely satisfied with their careers and with their colleagues; 90% of nurse practitioners reported being very or extremely satisfied by their relationships with patients, as did 86% of physician assistants.
The providers “appear to really enjoy working with individuals with MS,” Dr. Halpern said. But he cautioned that there’s a need for additional training for these providers; some respondents said their lack of knowledge was a hindrance to care.
The study was funded by the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. Dr. Halpern reported no relevant disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – A new survey suggests that advanced practice providers who care for multiple sclerosis patients are highly satisfied with their jobs, which encompass a wide range of responsibilities.
Researchers received survey responses from 215 nurse practitioners and 395 physician assistants who answered Web questionnaires in 2016 and 2017. Of those who care for multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, 92.5% and 77.8% respectively said they provide at least 9 of 11 services, such as direct care, supportive services, and care coordination.
“Nurse practitioners in particular are providing lots of different services from diagnosis to education to symptom management,” said Michael T. Halpern, MD, PhD, MPH, of Temple University, Philadelphia. “Physician assistants are also providing a diverse range of MS services, but not as frequently as nurse practitioners.”
Dr. Halpern was the presenting author of the study reporting the survey results. He spoke in a video interview at ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis, where the study findings were presented.
Advanced practice providers also reported high levels of job satisfaction. About 80% in both groups reported being very or extremely satisfied with their careers and with their colleagues; 90% of nurse practitioners reported being very or extremely satisfied by their relationships with patients, as did 86% of physician assistants.
The providers “appear to really enjoy working with individuals with MS,” Dr. Halpern said. But he cautioned that there’s a need for additional training for these providers; some respondents said their lack of knowledge was a hindrance to care.
The study was funded by the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. Dr. Halpern reported no relevant disclosures.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
‘Real-world evidence’ used to compare agents for relapsing-remitting MS
SAN DIEGO – Delayed-release dimethyl fumarate did not show any differences versus fingolimod in relapse rate over a 1-year, “real-world” study of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, but a significantly greater proportion of patients taking delayed-release dimethyl fumarate achieved relapse-free status and a lower annualized relapsed rate, compared with patients on glatiramer acetate
“There is a need for real-world data that compares the effectiveness of the growing number of MS [multiple sclerosis] treatment options,” Christophe Hotermans, MD, vice president of Global Medical Therapeutic Areas at Boston-based Biogen, said in an interview during ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. “These results were consistent with previous analyses of efficacy of these treatments in people with relapsing-remitting MS, which showed no significant differences in efficacy between delayed-release dimethyl fumarate [DMF, Tecfidera] versus fingolimod [FTY, Gilenya] and greater efficacy with dimethyl fumarate, compared with glatiramer acetate [GA].”
The findings come from EFFECT (Observational Study to Characterize Real-world Clinical Outcomes With Relapsing-remitting Multiple Sclerosis), a multicenter, international, retrospective, single-time-point medical record review study comparing the effectiveness of DMF vs. other disease-modifying therapies, including FTY and GA in patients with relapsing-remitting MS.
Endpoints included the Kaplan-Meier estimated proportion of patients who relapsed at 12 months and annualized relapse rate. Baseline covariates were used in estimating propensity scores. The data were divided into four strata using quartiles of propensity scores. After assessing for balance in baseline covariates between the treatment groups, Kaplan-Meier estimates of relapse and estimates of treatment effects were pooled across the four strata.
At the meeting, Jinny Min, PharmD, a medical postdoctoral research fellow at Biogen, reported results from 816 DMF patients, 781 FTY patients, and 1,042 GA patients. In the trimmed analysis set, the estimated proportion of DMF and FTY patients who relapsed at 12 months after treatment initiation was 12% vs. 13%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.07, P = .693; the adjusted rate ratio for annualized relapse was 1.09, P = .617). In the analysis of DMF vs. GA patients, the estimated proportion of DMF patients that relapsed at 12 months was 12% vs. 21%, respectively (HR, 0.71), which represented a significant decrease of 29% (P less than .02). The adjusted rate ratio for annualized relapse was 0.69, representing a significant decrease of 31% (P less than .01).
“We hope that these data help health care providers and people living with MS as they consider their treatment options,” Dr. Hotermans said. “The limitations of this study are similar to those that would be present in other retrospective studies that utilize real-world data. However, we worked to mitigate many of those limitations through a propensity-score estimation approach to adjust for confounders. An additional limitation that is inherent to the study design (retrospective chart review) is that patients’ medical history, MS disease, treatment history, and relapse history were limited to the information available in the medical records.”
The study was supported by Biogen, which markets DMF. Dr. Hotermans and Dr. Min are employees of the company.
SOURCE: Min J et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, Abstract P016.
SAN DIEGO – Delayed-release dimethyl fumarate did not show any differences versus fingolimod in relapse rate over a 1-year, “real-world” study of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, but a significantly greater proportion of patients taking delayed-release dimethyl fumarate achieved relapse-free status and a lower annualized relapsed rate, compared with patients on glatiramer acetate
“There is a need for real-world data that compares the effectiveness of the growing number of MS [multiple sclerosis] treatment options,” Christophe Hotermans, MD, vice president of Global Medical Therapeutic Areas at Boston-based Biogen, said in an interview during ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. “These results were consistent with previous analyses of efficacy of these treatments in people with relapsing-remitting MS, which showed no significant differences in efficacy between delayed-release dimethyl fumarate [DMF, Tecfidera] versus fingolimod [FTY, Gilenya] and greater efficacy with dimethyl fumarate, compared with glatiramer acetate [GA].”
The findings come from EFFECT (Observational Study to Characterize Real-world Clinical Outcomes With Relapsing-remitting Multiple Sclerosis), a multicenter, international, retrospective, single-time-point medical record review study comparing the effectiveness of DMF vs. other disease-modifying therapies, including FTY and GA in patients with relapsing-remitting MS.
Endpoints included the Kaplan-Meier estimated proportion of patients who relapsed at 12 months and annualized relapse rate. Baseline covariates were used in estimating propensity scores. The data were divided into four strata using quartiles of propensity scores. After assessing for balance in baseline covariates between the treatment groups, Kaplan-Meier estimates of relapse and estimates of treatment effects were pooled across the four strata.
At the meeting, Jinny Min, PharmD, a medical postdoctoral research fellow at Biogen, reported results from 816 DMF patients, 781 FTY patients, and 1,042 GA patients. In the trimmed analysis set, the estimated proportion of DMF and FTY patients who relapsed at 12 months after treatment initiation was 12% vs. 13%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.07, P = .693; the adjusted rate ratio for annualized relapse was 1.09, P = .617). In the analysis of DMF vs. GA patients, the estimated proportion of DMF patients that relapsed at 12 months was 12% vs. 21%, respectively (HR, 0.71), which represented a significant decrease of 29% (P less than .02). The adjusted rate ratio for annualized relapse was 0.69, representing a significant decrease of 31% (P less than .01).
“We hope that these data help health care providers and people living with MS as they consider their treatment options,” Dr. Hotermans said. “The limitations of this study are similar to those that would be present in other retrospective studies that utilize real-world data. However, we worked to mitigate many of those limitations through a propensity-score estimation approach to adjust for confounders. An additional limitation that is inherent to the study design (retrospective chart review) is that patients’ medical history, MS disease, treatment history, and relapse history were limited to the information available in the medical records.”
The study was supported by Biogen, which markets DMF. Dr. Hotermans and Dr. Min are employees of the company.
SOURCE: Min J et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, Abstract P016.
SAN DIEGO – Delayed-release dimethyl fumarate did not show any differences versus fingolimod in relapse rate over a 1-year, “real-world” study of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, but a significantly greater proportion of patients taking delayed-release dimethyl fumarate achieved relapse-free status and a lower annualized relapsed rate, compared with patients on glatiramer acetate
“There is a need for real-world data that compares the effectiveness of the growing number of MS [multiple sclerosis] treatment options,” Christophe Hotermans, MD, vice president of Global Medical Therapeutic Areas at Boston-based Biogen, said in an interview during ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. “These results were consistent with previous analyses of efficacy of these treatments in people with relapsing-remitting MS, which showed no significant differences in efficacy between delayed-release dimethyl fumarate [DMF, Tecfidera] versus fingolimod [FTY, Gilenya] and greater efficacy with dimethyl fumarate, compared with glatiramer acetate [GA].”
The findings come from EFFECT (Observational Study to Characterize Real-world Clinical Outcomes With Relapsing-remitting Multiple Sclerosis), a multicenter, international, retrospective, single-time-point medical record review study comparing the effectiveness of DMF vs. other disease-modifying therapies, including FTY and GA in patients with relapsing-remitting MS.
Endpoints included the Kaplan-Meier estimated proportion of patients who relapsed at 12 months and annualized relapse rate. Baseline covariates were used in estimating propensity scores. The data were divided into four strata using quartiles of propensity scores. After assessing for balance in baseline covariates between the treatment groups, Kaplan-Meier estimates of relapse and estimates of treatment effects were pooled across the four strata.
At the meeting, Jinny Min, PharmD, a medical postdoctoral research fellow at Biogen, reported results from 816 DMF patients, 781 FTY patients, and 1,042 GA patients. In the trimmed analysis set, the estimated proportion of DMF and FTY patients who relapsed at 12 months after treatment initiation was 12% vs. 13%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.07, P = .693; the adjusted rate ratio for annualized relapse was 1.09, P = .617). In the analysis of DMF vs. GA patients, the estimated proportion of DMF patients that relapsed at 12 months was 12% vs. 21%, respectively (HR, 0.71), which represented a significant decrease of 29% (P less than .02). The adjusted rate ratio for annualized relapse was 0.69, representing a significant decrease of 31% (P less than .01).
“We hope that these data help health care providers and people living with MS as they consider their treatment options,” Dr. Hotermans said. “The limitations of this study are similar to those that would be present in other retrospective studies that utilize real-world data. However, we worked to mitigate many of those limitations through a propensity-score estimation approach to adjust for confounders. An additional limitation that is inherent to the study design (retrospective chart review) is that patients’ medical history, MS disease, treatment history, and relapse history were limited to the information available in the medical records.”
The study was supported by Biogen, which markets DMF. Dr. Hotermans and Dr. Min are employees of the company.
SOURCE: Min J et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, Abstract P016.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Delayed-release dimethyl fumarate had a 29% lower risk of relapse during the 12-month period vs. glatiramer acetate.
Study details: Results from a multicenter study of 816 delayed-release dimethyl fumarate patients, 781 fingolimod patients, and 1,042 glatiramer acetate patients with relapsing-remitting MS.
Disclosures: The study was supported by Biogen, which markets delayed-release dimethyl fumarate. Dr. Hotermans and Dr. Min are employees of the company.
Source: Min J et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, Abstract P016.
Trial of clozapine, risperidone halted in MS
SAN DIEGO – New Zealand researchers halted a small trial that was testing the use of the antipsychotics clozapine and risperidone to treat progressive multiple sclerosis because significant side effects caused participants to withdraw.
The adverse events appeared even though the doses were much smaller than those routinely given to patients with psychiatric illnesses. “The neurologists realized it was in the participants’ best interest to stop,” said study lead author Anne Camille La Flamme, PhD, of Victoria University of Wellington (New Zealand). “Adverse events included dizziness, muscle weakness, and falls.”
The researchers launched the study – a blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial – to learn whether the two antipsychotic drugs, also known by the brand names Clozaril and Risperdal, have potential as treatments for progressive multiple sclerosis.
Previous in-vitro research had linked the drugs to anti-inflammatory effects in the central nervous system, Dr. La Flamme said, and researchers believed that the progressive form of MS might be especially vulnerable to their effects because of high immune system involvement.
The researchers planned to randomly assign three groups of 12 patients per arm to placebo, clozapine, and risperidone.
For clozapine, “the doses were very low, much lower than you’d expect for psychiatric use,” Dr. La Flamme said. A typical dose for psychiatric disorders is about 350 mg/day, she said, and the trial aimed to use 100-150 mg/day with an eye toward preventing dose-dependent side effects.
As for risperidone, a typical dose is about 4 mg/day, and the trial began at 2 mg/day and would increase to 3.5 mg/day, she said.
Three subjects in the clozapine group had to withdraw within 2 weeks when their doses had only reached an average of 35 mg/day. Two of three in the risperidone group withdrew within 4 months.
In light of the adverse effects, “it was deemed not wise to continue,” Dr. La Flamme said.
The placebo group, meanwhile, completed the trial at 178 days and had adverse effects that were more indicative of MS, she said.
What happened? One possibility is that disability from MS made the adverse events more evident, Dr. La Flamme said. Another possible explanation is that the underlying MS physiology changed the targets of the medications, she said.
“We have no conclusive evidence that would suggest one over the other,” she said. “But a lot of the evidence supports the idea that it’s a change in the physiology, that something about those pathways has been altered.”
It’s clear, she said, that the doses of the drugs in the trial were not appropriate. However, a big question remains: “We do not know whether these medicines are effective at reducing neuroinflammation.”
It’s possible, she said, that a “whisper of a dose” could still be effective. “It may get back to how these agents metabolize and become an active form.”
The study was funded by New Zealand’s Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Dr. La Flamme disclosed that the study team has a patent for repurposing of clozapine and risperidone to treat MS.
SOURCE: La Flamme A et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P031.
SAN DIEGO – New Zealand researchers halted a small trial that was testing the use of the antipsychotics clozapine and risperidone to treat progressive multiple sclerosis because significant side effects caused participants to withdraw.
The adverse events appeared even though the doses were much smaller than those routinely given to patients with psychiatric illnesses. “The neurologists realized it was in the participants’ best interest to stop,” said study lead author Anne Camille La Flamme, PhD, of Victoria University of Wellington (New Zealand). “Adverse events included dizziness, muscle weakness, and falls.”
The researchers launched the study – a blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial – to learn whether the two antipsychotic drugs, also known by the brand names Clozaril and Risperdal, have potential as treatments for progressive multiple sclerosis.
Previous in-vitro research had linked the drugs to anti-inflammatory effects in the central nervous system, Dr. La Flamme said, and researchers believed that the progressive form of MS might be especially vulnerable to their effects because of high immune system involvement.
The researchers planned to randomly assign three groups of 12 patients per arm to placebo, clozapine, and risperidone.
For clozapine, “the doses were very low, much lower than you’d expect for psychiatric use,” Dr. La Flamme said. A typical dose for psychiatric disorders is about 350 mg/day, she said, and the trial aimed to use 100-150 mg/day with an eye toward preventing dose-dependent side effects.
As for risperidone, a typical dose is about 4 mg/day, and the trial began at 2 mg/day and would increase to 3.5 mg/day, she said.
Three subjects in the clozapine group had to withdraw within 2 weeks when their doses had only reached an average of 35 mg/day. Two of three in the risperidone group withdrew within 4 months.
In light of the adverse effects, “it was deemed not wise to continue,” Dr. La Flamme said.
The placebo group, meanwhile, completed the trial at 178 days and had adverse effects that were more indicative of MS, she said.
What happened? One possibility is that disability from MS made the adverse events more evident, Dr. La Flamme said. Another possible explanation is that the underlying MS physiology changed the targets of the medications, she said.
“We have no conclusive evidence that would suggest one over the other,” she said. “But a lot of the evidence supports the idea that it’s a change in the physiology, that something about those pathways has been altered.”
It’s clear, she said, that the doses of the drugs in the trial were not appropriate. However, a big question remains: “We do not know whether these medicines are effective at reducing neuroinflammation.”
It’s possible, she said, that a “whisper of a dose” could still be effective. “It may get back to how these agents metabolize and become an active form.”
The study was funded by New Zealand’s Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Dr. La Flamme disclosed that the study team has a patent for repurposing of clozapine and risperidone to treat MS.
SOURCE: La Flamme A et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P031.
SAN DIEGO – New Zealand researchers halted a small trial that was testing the use of the antipsychotics clozapine and risperidone to treat progressive multiple sclerosis because significant side effects caused participants to withdraw.
The adverse events appeared even though the doses were much smaller than those routinely given to patients with psychiatric illnesses. “The neurologists realized it was in the participants’ best interest to stop,” said study lead author Anne Camille La Flamme, PhD, of Victoria University of Wellington (New Zealand). “Adverse events included dizziness, muscle weakness, and falls.”
The researchers launched the study – a blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial – to learn whether the two antipsychotic drugs, also known by the brand names Clozaril and Risperdal, have potential as treatments for progressive multiple sclerosis.
Previous in-vitro research had linked the drugs to anti-inflammatory effects in the central nervous system, Dr. La Flamme said, and researchers believed that the progressive form of MS might be especially vulnerable to their effects because of high immune system involvement.
The researchers planned to randomly assign three groups of 12 patients per arm to placebo, clozapine, and risperidone.
For clozapine, “the doses were very low, much lower than you’d expect for psychiatric use,” Dr. La Flamme said. A typical dose for psychiatric disorders is about 350 mg/day, she said, and the trial aimed to use 100-150 mg/day with an eye toward preventing dose-dependent side effects.
As for risperidone, a typical dose is about 4 mg/day, and the trial began at 2 mg/day and would increase to 3.5 mg/day, she said.
Three subjects in the clozapine group had to withdraw within 2 weeks when their doses had only reached an average of 35 mg/day. Two of three in the risperidone group withdrew within 4 months.
In light of the adverse effects, “it was deemed not wise to continue,” Dr. La Flamme said.
The placebo group, meanwhile, completed the trial at 178 days and had adverse effects that were more indicative of MS, she said.
What happened? One possibility is that disability from MS made the adverse events more evident, Dr. La Flamme said. Another possible explanation is that the underlying MS physiology changed the targets of the medications, she said.
“We have no conclusive evidence that would suggest one over the other,” she said. “But a lot of the evidence supports the idea that it’s a change in the physiology, that something about those pathways has been altered.”
It’s clear, she said, that the doses of the drugs in the trial were not appropriate. However, a big question remains: “We do not know whether these medicines are effective at reducing neuroinflammation.”
It’s possible, she said, that a “whisper of a dose” could still be effective. “It may get back to how these agents metabolize and become an active form.”
The study was funded by New Zealand’s Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Dr. La Flamme disclosed that the study team has a patent for repurposing of clozapine and risperidone to treat MS.
SOURCE: La Flamme A et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P031.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS Forum 2018
VIDEO: Managing the alemtuzumab paradox
SAN DIEGO – A paradox of treating people with the monoclonal antibody alemtuzumab is that the agent can be an effective therapy for many people living with multiple sclerosis, but in some patients is associated with the development of other autoimmune diseases.
“I counsel patients with multiple sclerosis that this is a high risk, high gain drug,” Alasdair Coles, MD, of the University of Cambridge (England), said at the meeting, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
Patients can make it safer through strict compliance with the drug’s risk monitoring program. But without patient compliance, alemtuzumab becomes a dangerous drug, he said in a video interview.
Knowing in advance which patients are at an elevated risk for subsequent autoimmune diseases has been difficult to predict. But researchers are getting closer, Dr. Coles said. In the future, measuring a serum factor, potentially interleukin 21, could produce a pretreatment risk assessment for each individual.
SAN DIEGO – A paradox of treating people with the monoclonal antibody alemtuzumab is that the agent can be an effective therapy for many people living with multiple sclerosis, but in some patients is associated with the development of other autoimmune diseases.
“I counsel patients with multiple sclerosis that this is a high risk, high gain drug,” Alasdair Coles, MD, of the University of Cambridge (England), said at the meeting, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
Patients can make it safer through strict compliance with the drug’s risk monitoring program. But without patient compliance, alemtuzumab becomes a dangerous drug, he said in a video interview.
Knowing in advance which patients are at an elevated risk for subsequent autoimmune diseases has been difficult to predict. But researchers are getting closer, Dr. Coles said. In the future, measuring a serum factor, potentially interleukin 21, could produce a pretreatment risk assessment for each individual.
SAN DIEGO – A paradox of treating people with the monoclonal antibody alemtuzumab is that the agent can be an effective therapy for many people living with multiple sclerosis, but in some patients is associated with the development of other autoimmune diseases.
“I counsel patients with multiple sclerosis that this is a high risk, high gain drug,” Alasdair Coles, MD, of the University of Cambridge (England), said at the meeting, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
Patients can make it safer through strict compliance with the drug’s risk monitoring program. But without patient compliance, alemtuzumab becomes a dangerous drug, he said in a video interview.
Knowing in advance which patients are at an elevated risk for subsequent autoimmune diseases has been difficult to predict. But researchers are getting closer, Dr. Coles said. In the future, measuring a serum factor, potentially interleukin 21, could produce a pretreatment risk assessment for each individual.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
Third course of alemtuzumab can improve MS outcomes
SAN DIEGO – Approximately 30% of people with active multiple sclerosis who initially responded well to two courses of alemtuzumab in the CARE-MS II trial experience relapse or MRI activity over time. But investigators set out to determine whether retreatment with a subsequent course of alemtuzumab is worthwhile.
“What we found is, after the third course, they continued to do well again – at this point for an average of another 3-4 years,” Ann D. Bass, MD, said in an interview at the meeting, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
“The take-home message is if they do need to be retreated after those two courses, it doesn’t [necessarily] mean they are a treatment failure. Give them another chance and see if they will do well with a third course, which is what they did,” said Dr. Bass, of the Neurology Center of San Antonio.
Through year 6 of an extension study with 393 of the original CARE-MS II trial participants, 45% received one or more additional courses of alemtuzumab. Participants were required to wait 12 months or more after completion of the two initial courses of therapy. This figure includes 30% who received a third course of alemtuzumab, 12% who received a fourth course, and 2% and 1% who received a fifth or sixth course, respectively.
“The average time until they needed a third course was 2.5 years after the second course; so they didn’t need it right away,” Dr. Bass said. “The majority, even at 6 years, did not need to have a third course.”
When patients did require a subsequent course, “about half needed it because of clinical relapse; one-quarter needed it because of MRI relapse; and about one-quarter needed it because of both,” Dr. Bass said during a poster presentation.
In terms of effectiveness, the annual relapse rate significantly decreased following a third course of alemtuzumab, from 0.85 in the 12 months prior to the third course to 0.20 in the 12 months after (P less than .0001). In these patients, the annual relapse rate remained low, at 0.17, up to 3 years later.
Investigators also tracked disability using the Expanded Disability Status Scale. They found that more than two-thirds, 68%, maintained stable or had improved scores after administration of a third alemtuzumab course. In addition, the percentage of patients with confirmed disability improvement increased from 4.4% in the 12 months prior to a third course to 14.4% in the year following pretreatment.
Retreatment was at the patient’s discretion. “The patients have the right to say ‘No, I’m doing great. I don’t want to be retreated’ or ‘I want to explore other options’ for whatever reason,” Dr. Bass said. “That’s rare though; most patients actually say yes.”
To qualify for retreatment based on MRI findings, patients had to have at least two lesions – one enlarging and one enhancing, two enlarging, or two new.
Only patients who opted for a subsequent course of alemtuzumab were included in the current analysis; those who chose a different disease-modifying therapy were excluded.
“Many achieve clinical and MRI remission. I never say cure – you don’t want to say that word,” Dr. Bass said.
Sanofi and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals supported the study. Dr. Bass reported that she is a principal investigator, speaker, and member of the advisory board for Sanofi Genzyme.
SOURCE: Bass A et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018 Poster P035.
SAN DIEGO – Approximately 30% of people with active multiple sclerosis who initially responded well to two courses of alemtuzumab in the CARE-MS II trial experience relapse or MRI activity over time. But investigators set out to determine whether retreatment with a subsequent course of alemtuzumab is worthwhile.
“What we found is, after the third course, they continued to do well again – at this point for an average of another 3-4 years,” Ann D. Bass, MD, said in an interview at the meeting, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
“The take-home message is if they do need to be retreated after those two courses, it doesn’t [necessarily] mean they are a treatment failure. Give them another chance and see if they will do well with a third course, which is what they did,” said Dr. Bass, of the Neurology Center of San Antonio.
Through year 6 of an extension study with 393 of the original CARE-MS II trial participants, 45% received one or more additional courses of alemtuzumab. Participants were required to wait 12 months or more after completion of the two initial courses of therapy. This figure includes 30% who received a third course of alemtuzumab, 12% who received a fourth course, and 2% and 1% who received a fifth or sixth course, respectively.
“The average time until they needed a third course was 2.5 years after the second course; so they didn’t need it right away,” Dr. Bass said. “The majority, even at 6 years, did not need to have a third course.”
When patients did require a subsequent course, “about half needed it because of clinical relapse; one-quarter needed it because of MRI relapse; and about one-quarter needed it because of both,” Dr. Bass said during a poster presentation.
In terms of effectiveness, the annual relapse rate significantly decreased following a third course of alemtuzumab, from 0.85 in the 12 months prior to the third course to 0.20 in the 12 months after (P less than .0001). In these patients, the annual relapse rate remained low, at 0.17, up to 3 years later.
Investigators also tracked disability using the Expanded Disability Status Scale. They found that more than two-thirds, 68%, maintained stable or had improved scores after administration of a third alemtuzumab course. In addition, the percentage of patients with confirmed disability improvement increased from 4.4% in the 12 months prior to a third course to 14.4% in the year following pretreatment.
Retreatment was at the patient’s discretion. “The patients have the right to say ‘No, I’m doing great. I don’t want to be retreated’ or ‘I want to explore other options’ for whatever reason,” Dr. Bass said. “That’s rare though; most patients actually say yes.”
To qualify for retreatment based on MRI findings, patients had to have at least two lesions – one enlarging and one enhancing, two enlarging, or two new.
Only patients who opted for a subsequent course of alemtuzumab were included in the current analysis; those who chose a different disease-modifying therapy were excluded.
“Many achieve clinical and MRI remission. I never say cure – you don’t want to say that word,” Dr. Bass said.
Sanofi and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals supported the study. Dr. Bass reported that she is a principal investigator, speaker, and member of the advisory board for Sanofi Genzyme.
SOURCE: Bass A et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018 Poster P035.
SAN DIEGO – Approximately 30% of people with active multiple sclerosis who initially responded well to two courses of alemtuzumab in the CARE-MS II trial experience relapse or MRI activity over time. But investigators set out to determine whether retreatment with a subsequent course of alemtuzumab is worthwhile.
“What we found is, after the third course, they continued to do well again – at this point for an average of another 3-4 years,” Ann D. Bass, MD, said in an interview at the meeting, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
“The take-home message is if they do need to be retreated after those two courses, it doesn’t [necessarily] mean they are a treatment failure. Give them another chance and see if they will do well with a third course, which is what they did,” said Dr. Bass, of the Neurology Center of San Antonio.
Through year 6 of an extension study with 393 of the original CARE-MS II trial participants, 45% received one or more additional courses of alemtuzumab. Participants were required to wait 12 months or more after completion of the two initial courses of therapy. This figure includes 30% who received a third course of alemtuzumab, 12% who received a fourth course, and 2% and 1% who received a fifth or sixth course, respectively.
“The average time until they needed a third course was 2.5 years after the second course; so they didn’t need it right away,” Dr. Bass said. “The majority, even at 6 years, did not need to have a third course.”
When patients did require a subsequent course, “about half needed it because of clinical relapse; one-quarter needed it because of MRI relapse; and about one-quarter needed it because of both,” Dr. Bass said during a poster presentation.
In terms of effectiveness, the annual relapse rate significantly decreased following a third course of alemtuzumab, from 0.85 in the 12 months prior to the third course to 0.20 in the 12 months after (P less than .0001). In these patients, the annual relapse rate remained low, at 0.17, up to 3 years later.
Investigators also tracked disability using the Expanded Disability Status Scale. They found that more than two-thirds, 68%, maintained stable or had improved scores after administration of a third alemtuzumab course. In addition, the percentage of patients with confirmed disability improvement increased from 4.4% in the 12 months prior to a third course to 14.4% in the year following pretreatment.
Retreatment was at the patient’s discretion. “The patients have the right to say ‘No, I’m doing great. I don’t want to be retreated’ or ‘I want to explore other options’ for whatever reason,” Dr. Bass said. “That’s rare though; most patients actually say yes.”
To qualify for retreatment based on MRI findings, patients had to have at least two lesions – one enlarging and one enhancing, two enlarging, or two new.
Only patients who opted for a subsequent course of alemtuzumab were included in the current analysis; those who chose a different disease-modifying therapy were excluded.
“Many achieve clinical and MRI remission. I never say cure – you don’t want to say that word,” Dr. Bass said.
Sanofi and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals supported the study. Dr. Bass reported that she is a principal investigator, speaker, and member of the advisory board for Sanofi Genzyme.
SOURCE: Bass A et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018 Poster P035.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The annual relapse rate significantly decreased following a third course of alemtuzumab, from 0.85 in the 12 months prior to the third course to 0.20 in the 12 months after (P less than .0001).
Study details: An extension study of the CARE-MS II trial involving 393 of the original study participants.
Disclosures: Sanofi and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals supported the study. Dr. Bass reported that she is a principal investigator, speaker, and member of the advisory board for Sanofi Genzyme.
Source: Bass A et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018 Poster P035.
Switching RRMS patients to daclizumab beta appears safe
SAN DIEGO – Switching relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients from glatiramer acetate to daclizumab beta resulted in no increase in the adverse event profile and was associated with superior efficacy, a post hoc analysis of data from the DECIDE study showed.
“There is always a challenge in transitioning patients from one therapeutic agent to another, with concerns for adequate efficacy to justify the switch, and heightened risks of toxicity or adverse events,” lead study author Stanley L. Cohan, MD, PhD, said in an interview prior to the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. “Daclizumab is not a first-line or platform therapeutic agent, but has clearly superior efficacy to first-line medication, and, based upon the current data presented, safety and efficacy are not adversely influenced by prior treatment history with a first-line agent.”
In the phase 3 DECIDE trial, daclizumab beta 150 mg demonstrated greater efficacy versus intramuscular (IM) interferon (IFN) beta-1a 30 mcg on several clinical, radiographic, and patient-centered outcomes in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (N Engl J Med 2015; 373:1418-28). The purpose of the current study was to examine the efficacy and safety of daclizumab beta vs. IM IFN beta-1a in the subgroup of RRMS patients treated with glatiramer acetate (GA) as their only previous disease-modifying therapy (DMT) before entering DECIDE.
Dr. Cohan, a neurologist who directs the Providence MS Center at the Providence Brain and Spine Institute in Portland, Ore., and his associates reported data from 42 of 922 (5%) IM IFN beta-1a and 50 of 919 (5%) daclizumab beta patients who had received treatment with GA only prior to DECIDE. Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups, including duration of prior treatment with GA, reasons for discontinuing GA, and time between GA discontinuation and start of treatment in DECIDE. The annualized relapse rate was 42% lower in patients treated with daclizumab beta vs. IM IFN beta-1a (rate ratio of 0.58). Daclizumab beta also reduced risk of relapse by 53% (hazard ratio of 0.47; P = .048) and the mean number of new or newly-enlarging T2-hyperintense lesions at week 96 by 58% (lesion mean ratio, 0.42; P = .021) vs. IM IFN beta-1a.
In patients treated with GA only before DECIDE, 98% of IM IFN beta-1a patients and 94% of daclizumab beta patients reported any adverse event (AE). In all, 2% of IM IFN beta-1a patients and 16% of daclizumab beta patients had a serious AE (excluding MS relapse), and 10% of IM IFN beta-1a and 12% of daclizumab beta patients discontinued treatment because of an AE (excluding MS relapse).
The incidence of elevations of alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase three times the upper limit of normal or greater was 10% in the IM IFN beta-1a group and 8% in the daclizumab beta, while the ALT and AST elevations were greater than five times the ULN in 0% and 4% of patients, respectively.
Serious adverse events were reported in eight participants in the daclizumab beta group (including abortion induced, ankle fracture, anal fistula, anxiety, appendicitis perforated, convulsion, pelvic abscess, inguinal hernia, abnormal cervix smear), and one participant in the IM IFN beta-1a group (ligament rupture).
“This post hoc analysis demonstrates that in switching from glatiramer to daclizumab there was no unanticipated or increase in the AE profile, and that a switch from glatiramer to daclizumab was associated with superior efficacy, again in line with overall efficacy observed for daclizumab in this study,” Dr. Cohan said.
He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the post hoc nature of the analysis. “The small glatiramer cohort size, and the large percentage of former glatiramer patients who entered DECIDE because of lack of glatiramer efficacy may have introduced a selection bias which would magnify the seeming efficacy of daclizumab, and interferon-beta,” he added.
Dr. Cohan reported that he receives research support from Biogen, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Mallinckrodt, and speaking honoraria from Acorda, Biogen, Roche, and Sanofi. He has served on advisory boards for Biogen, Sanofi, and Novartis.
SOURCE: Cohan et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, Poster 42.
SAN DIEGO – Switching relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients from glatiramer acetate to daclizumab beta resulted in no increase in the adverse event profile and was associated with superior efficacy, a post hoc analysis of data from the DECIDE study showed.
“There is always a challenge in transitioning patients from one therapeutic agent to another, with concerns for adequate efficacy to justify the switch, and heightened risks of toxicity or adverse events,” lead study author Stanley L. Cohan, MD, PhD, said in an interview prior to the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. “Daclizumab is not a first-line or platform therapeutic agent, but has clearly superior efficacy to first-line medication, and, based upon the current data presented, safety and efficacy are not adversely influenced by prior treatment history with a first-line agent.”
In the phase 3 DECIDE trial, daclizumab beta 150 mg demonstrated greater efficacy versus intramuscular (IM) interferon (IFN) beta-1a 30 mcg on several clinical, radiographic, and patient-centered outcomes in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (N Engl J Med 2015; 373:1418-28). The purpose of the current study was to examine the efficacy and safety of daclizumab beta vs. IM IFN beta-1a in the subgroup of RRMS patients treated with glatiramer acetate (GA) as their only previous disease-modifying therapy (DMT) before entering DECIDE.
Dr. Cohan, a neurologist who directs the Providence MS Center at the Providence Brain and Spine Institute in Portland, Ore., and his associates reported data from 42 of 922 (5%) IM IFN beta-1a and 50 of 919 (5%) daclizumab beta patients who had received treatment with GA only prior to DECIDE. Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups, including duration of prior treatment with GA, reasons for discontinuing GA, and time between GA discontinuation and start of treatment in DECIDE. The annualized relapse rate was 42% lower in patients treated with daclizumab beta vs. IM IFN beta-1a (rate ratio of 0.58). Daclizumab beta also reduced risk of relapse by 53% (hazard ratio of 0.47; P = .048) and the mean number of new or newly-enlarging T2-hyperintense lesions at week 96 by 58% (lesion mean ratio, 0.42; P = .021) vs. IM IFN beta-1a.
In patients treated with GA only before DECIDE, 98% of IM IFN beta-1a patients and 94% of daclizumab beta patients reported any adverse event (AE). In all, 2% of IM IFN beta-1a patients and 16% of daclizumab beta patients had a serious AE (excluding MS relapse), and 10% of IM IFN beta-1a and 12% of daclizumab beta patients discontinued treatment because of an AE (excluding MS relapse).
The incidence of elevations of alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase three times the upper limit of normal or greater was 10% in the IM IFN beta-1a group and 8% in the daclizumab beta, while the ALT and AST elevations were greater than five times the ULN in 0% and 4% of patients, respectively.
Serious adverse events were reported in eight participants in the daclizumab beta group (including abortion induced, ankle fracture, anal fistula, anxiety, appendicitis perforated, convulsion, pelvic abscess, inguinal hernia, abnormal cervix smear), and one participant in the IM IFN beta-1a group (ligament rupture).
“This post hoc analysis demonstrates that in switching from glatiramer to daclizumab there was no unanticipated or increase in the AE profile, and that a switch from glatiramer to daclizumab was associated with superior efficacy, again in line with overall efficacy observed for daclizumab in this study,” Dr. Cohan said.
He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the post hoc nature of the analysis. “The small glatiramer cohort size, and the large percentage of former glatiramer patients who entered DECIDE because of lack of glatiramer efficacy may have introduced a selection bias which would magnify the seeming efficacy of daclizumab, and interferon-beta,” he added.
Dr. Cohan reported that he receives research support from Biogen, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Mallinckrodt, and speaking honoraria from Acorda, Biogen, Roche, and Sanofi. He has served on advisory boards for Biogen, Sanofi, and Novartis.
SOURCE: Cohan et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, Poster 42.
SAN DIEGO – Switching relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients from glatiramer acetate to daclizumab beta resulted in no increase in the adverse event profile and was associated with superior efficacy, a post hoc analysis of data from the DECIDE study showed.
“There is always a challenge in transitioning patients from one therapeutic agent to another, with concerns for adequate efficacy to justify the switch, and heightened risks of toxicity or adverse events,” lead study author Stanley L. Cohan, MD, PhD, said in an interview prior to the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. “Daclizumab is not a first-line or platform therapeutic agent, but has clearly superior efficacy to first-line medication, and, based upon the current data presented, safety and efficacy are not adversely influenced by prior treatment history with a first-line agent.”
In the phase 3 DECIDE trial, daclizumab beta 150 mg demonstrated greater efficacy versus intramuscular (IM) interferon (IFN) beta-1a 30 mcg on several clinical, radiographic, and patient-centered outcomes in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (N Engl J Med 2015; 373:1418-28). The purpose of the current study was to examine the efficacy and safety of daclizumab beta vs. IM IFN beta-1a in the subgroup of RRMS patients treated with glatiramer acetate (GA) as their only previous disease-modifying therapy (DMT) before entering DECIDE.
Dr. Cohan, a neurologist who directs the Providence MS Center at the Providence Brain and Spine Institute in Portland, Ore., and his associates reported data from 42 of 922 (5%) IM IFN beta-1a and 50 of 919 (5%) daclizumab beta patients who had received treatment with GA only prior to DECIDE. Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups, including duration of prior treatment with GA, reasons for discontinuing GA, and time between GA discontinuation and start of treatment in DECIDE. The annualized relapse rate was 42% lower in patients treated with daclizumab beta vs. IM IFN beta-1a (rate ratio of 0.58). Daclizumab beta also reduced risk of relapse by 53% (hazard ratio of 0.47; P = .048) and the mean number of new or newly-enlarging T2-hyperintense lesions at week 96 by 58% (lesion mean ratio, 0.42; P = .021) vs. IM IFN beta-1a.
In patients treated with GA only before DECIDE, 98% of IM IFN beta-1a patients and 94% of daclizumab beta patients reported any adverse event (AE). In all, 2% of IM IFN beta-1a patients and 16% of daclizumab beta patients had a serious AE (excluding MS relapse), and 10% of IM IFN beta-1a and 12% of daclizumab beta patients discontinued treatment because of an AE (excluding MS relapse).
The incidence of elevations of alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase three times the upper limit of normal or greater was 10% in the IM IFN beta-1a group and 8% in the daclizumab beta, while the ALT and AST elevations were greater than five times the ULN in 0% and 4% of patients, respectively.
Serious adverse events were reported in eight participants in the daclizumab beta group (including abortion induced, ankle fracture, anal fistula, anxiety, appendicitis perforated, convulsion, pelvic abscess, inguinal hernia, abnormal cervix smear), and one participant in the IM IFN beta-1a group (ligament rupture).
“This post hoc analysis demonstrates that in switching from glatiramer to daclizumab there was no unanticipated or increase in the AE profile, and that a switch from glatiramer to daclizumab was associated with superior efficacy, again in line with overall efficacy observed for daclizumab in this study,” Dr. Cohan said.
He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the post hoc nature of the analysis. “The small glatiramer cohort size, and the large percentage of former glatiramer patients who entered DECIDE because of lack of glatiramer efficacy may have introduced a selection bias which would magnify the seeming efficacy of daclizumab, and interferon-beta,” he added.
Dr. Cohan reported that he receives research support from Biogen, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Mallinckrodt, and speaking honoraria from Acorda, Biogen, Roche, and Sanofi. He has served on advisory boards for Biogen, Sanofi, and Novartis.
SOURCE: Cohan et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, Poster 42.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The annualized relapse rate was 42% lower in patients treated with daclizumab beta vs. IM IFN beta-1a (rate ratio of 0.58).
Study details: A post hoc analysis of 42 of 922 (5%) IM IFN beta-1a and 50 of 919 (5%) daclizumab beta patients who had received treatment with glatiramer acetate only prior to the DECIDE trial.
Disclosures: Dr. Cohan reported that he receives research support from Biogen, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Mallinckrodt, and speaking honoraria from Acorda, Biogen, Roche, and Sanofi. He has served on advisory boards for Biogen, Sanofi, and Novartis.
Source: Cohan S et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018 Poster 42.
VIDEO: Oral ozanimod shows promise for relapsing MS
SAN DIEGO – A pair of phase 3 studies offer promising results regarding the safety and efficacy of ozanimod, an experimental immunomodulator, in the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS).
The medication targets sphingosine 1-phosphate 1 and 5 receptors. Industry-funded researchers tested it in two studies against interferon beta-1a.
One study, called SUNBEAM, tested once-daily oral ozanimod (1 mg or 0.5 mg with 7-day dose escalation) against interferon beta-1a (via 30 mcg weekly intramuscular injection) for at least 12 months in 1,346 patients with RMS. The annualized relapse rate, the primary endpoint, was lower in the ozanimod groups versus interferon. For the 1-mg dose, it was 0.181 (P less than .0001), and for 0.5-mg dose, 0.241 (P = .0013).
The number of serious treatment-emergent adverse events in the three groups was low, ranging from 2.5% to 3.5%.
The other study, called RADIANCE, was a similar trial that lasted 24 months. In it, the rate of serious treatment-emergent adverse events in the three groups were similar, ranging from 6.4% to 7.1%.
Ozanimod offers “an excellent therapeutic benefit for patients and a very clean safety profile,” said Bruce Cree, MD, PhD, clinical research director at the University of California, San Francisco, Multiple Sclerosis Center. He is an author on both studies and spoke in a video interview at ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
He said the ozanimod should be especially useful as a first-line treatment for MS. The drug is currently being evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration for an RMS indication, and it is also being developed for Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, he said.
The study was funded by Receptos, a wholly owned subsidiary of Celgene. Dr. Cree reported that he has been a consultant to AbbVie, Biogen, EMD Serono, Genzyme, Novartis, and Shire.
SOURCE: Cree B et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P030, and Comi G et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P023
SAN DIEGO – A pair of phase 3 studies offer promising results regarding the safety and efficacy of ozanimod, an experimental immunomodulator, in the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS).
The medication targets sphingosine 1-phosphate 1 and 5 receptors. Industry-funded researchers tested it in two studies against interferon beta-1a.
One study, called SUNBEAM, tested once-daily oral ozanimod (1 mg or 0.5 mg with 7-day dose escalation) against interferon beta-1a (via 30 mcg weekly intramuscular injection) for at least 12 months in 1,346 patients with RMS. The annualized relapse rate, the primary endpoint, was lower in the ozanimod groups versus interferon. For the 1-mg dose, it was 0.181 (P less than .0001), and for 0.5-mg dose, 0.241 (P = .0013).
The number of serious treatment-emergent adverse events in the three groups was low, ranging from 2.5% to 3.5%.
The other study, called RADIANCE, was a similar trial that lasted 24 months. In it, the rate of serious treatment-emergent adverse events in the three groups were similar, ranging from 6.4% to 7.1%.
Ozanimod offers “an excellent therapeutic benefit for patients and a very clean safety profile,” said Bruce Cree, MD, PhD, clinical research director at the University of California, San Francisco, Multiple Sclerosis Center. He is an author on both studies and spoke in a video interview at ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
He said the ozanimod should be especially useful as a first-line treatment for MS. The drug is currently being evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration for an RMS indication, and it is also being developed for Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, he said.
The study was funded by Receptos, a wholly owned subsidiary of Celgene. Dr. Cree reported that he has been a consultant to AbbVie, Biogen, EMD Serono, Genzyme, Novartis, and Shire.
SOURCE: Cree B et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P030, and Comi G et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P023
SAN DIEGO – A pair of phase 3 studies offer promising results regarding the safety and efficacy of ozanimod, an experimental immunomodulator, in the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS).
The medication targets sphingosine 1-phosphate 1 and 5 receptors. Industry-funded researchers tested it in two studies against interferon beta-1a.
One study, called SUNBEAM, tested once-daily oral ozanimod (1 mg or 0.5 mg with 7-day dose escalation) against interferon beta-1a (via 30 mcg weekly intramuscular injection) for at least 12 months in 1,346 patients with RMS. The annualized relapse rate, the primary endpoint, was lower in the ozanimod groups versus interferon. For the 1-mg dose, it was 0.181 (P less than .0001), and for 0.5-mg dose, 0.241 (P = .0013).
The number of serious treatment-emergent adverse events in the three groups was low, ranging from 2.5% to 3.5%.
The other study, called RADIANCE, was a similar trial that lasted 24 months. In it, the rate of serious treatment-emergent adverse events in the three groups were similar, ranging from 6.4% to 7.1%.
Ozanimod offers “an excellent therapeutic benefit for patients and a very clean safety profile,” said Bruce Cree, MD, PhD, clinical research director at the University of California, San Francisco, Multiple Sclerosis Center. He is an author on both studies and spoke in a video interview at ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
He said the ozanimod should be especially useful as a first-line treatment for MS. The drug is currently being evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration for an RMS indication, and it is also being developed for Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, he said.
The study was funded by Receptos, a wholly owned subsidiary of Celgene. Dr. Cree reported that he has been a consultant to AbbVie, Biogen, EMD Serono, Genzyme, Novartis, and Shire.
SOURCE: Cree B et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P030, and Comi G et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P023
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
VIDEO: Efficacy of DMTs decreases with age
San Diego – , and high-efficacy drugs do a better job of inhibiting MS disability compared with low-efficacy drugs only in patients younger than 40.5 years.
Those are the key conclusions from a meta-analysis of the age-dependent efficacy of MS treatments that was published in the November 2017 issue of Frontiers in Neurology. In a video interview, Ann Marie Weideman, lead study author, discussed highlights from the meta-analysis at the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. The meta-analysis drew from more than 28,000 individuals with MS participating in 38 trials of 13 categories of immunomodulatory drugs.
Ms. Weideman is an IRTA Fellow at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Bethesda, Md. She reported that study coauthor Bibiana Bielekova, MD, is coinventor of several patents related to daclizumab.
San Diego – , and high-efficacy drugs do a better job of inhibiting MS disability compared with low-efficacy drugs only in patients younger than 40.5 years.
Those are the key conclusions from a meta-analysis of the age-dependent efficacy of MS treatments that was published in the November 2017 issue of Frontiers in Neurology. In a video interview, Ann Marie Weideman, lead study author, discussed highlights from the meta-analysis at the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. The meta-analysis drew from more than 28,000 individuals with MS participating in 38 trials of 13 categories of immunomodulatory drugs.
Ms. Weideman is an IRTA Fellow at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Bethesda, Md. She reported that study coauthor Bibiana Bielekova, MD, is coinventor of several patents related to daclizumab.
San Diego – , and high-efficacy drugs do a better job of inhibiting MS disability compared with low-efficacy drugs only in patients younger than 40.5 years.
Those are the key conclusions from a meta-analysis of the age-dependent efficacy of MS treatments that was published in the November 2017 issue of Frontiers in Neurology. In a video interview, Ann Marie Weideman, lead study author, discussed highlights from the meta-analysis at the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. The meta-analysis drew from more than 28,000 individuals with MS participating in 38 trials of 13 categories of immunomodulatory drugs.
Ms. Weideman is an IRTA Fellow at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Bethesda, Md. She reported that study coauthor Bibiana Bielekova, MD, is coinventor of several patents related to daclizumab.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
VIDEO: New MS ambulatory measure could fill clinical gap
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
SAN DIEGO – Although clinical tools to assess ambulatory function among people with multiple sclerosis exist, some measure it as part of a comprehensive assessment while others require the patient to answer many questions and then clinicians to calculate a score.
To devise a more targeted, simpler instrument, Emily Evans, MD, and her colleagues developed the PDAS or Patient Derived Ambulation Scale. They evaluated the correlation of this single-item scale to assess ambulation – an important measure of patient function – and evaluated how the results correlated with existing tools such as the Patient Determined Disease Steps and 12-item MS Walking Scale. Dr. Evans presented preliminary findings at the ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
“We feel this is a quick test that can be readily implemented into clinical practice,” Dr. Evans, a neurologist at the John L. Trotter MS Center at Washington University in St. Louis, said in a video interview.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
SAN DIEGO – Although clinical tools to assess ambulatory function among people with multiple sclerosis exist, some measure it as part of a comprehensive assessment while others require the patient to answer many questions and then clinicians to calculate a score.
To devise a more targeted, simpler instrument, Emily Evans, MD, and her colleagues developed the PDAS or Patient Derived Ambulation Scale. They evaluated the correlation of this single-item scale to assess ambulation – an important measure of patient function – and evaluated how the results correlated with existing tools such as the Patient Determined Disease Steps and 12-item MS Walking Scale. Dr. Evans presented preliminary findings at the ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
“We feel this is a quick test that can be readily implemented into clinical practice,” Dr. Evans, a neurologist at the John L. Trotter MS Center at Washington University in St. Louis, said in a video interview.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
SAN DIEGO – Although clinical tools to assess ambulatory function among people with multiple sclerosis exist, some measure it as part of a comprehensive assessment while others require the patient to answer many questions and then clinicians to calculate a score.
To devise a more targeted, simpler instrument, Emily Evans, MD, and her colleagues developed the PDAS or Patient Derived Ambulation Scale. They evaluated the correlation of this single-item scale to assess ambulation – an important measure of patient function – and evaluated how the results correlated with existing tools such as the Patient Determined Disease Steps and 12-item MS Walking Scale. Dr. Evans presented preliminary findings at the ACTRIMS Forum 2018, held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
“We feel this is a quick test that can be readily implemented into clinical practice,” Dr. Evans, a neurologist at the John L. Trotter MS Center at Washington University in St. Louis, said in a video interview.
VIDEO: Alemtuzumab associated with long-term MS control in TOPAZ study
SAN DIEGO – A majority of patients with active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and inadequate response to previous therapy achieved a durable response after treatment with alemtuzumab in the TOPAZ trial, a 5-year extension to the CARE-MS II study.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Almost half of the 317 participants in TOPAZ received no further therapy beyond their initial two courses of alemtuzumab infusion therapy that they received as part of the CARE-MS II study.
“If you follow patients over time ... you’re seeing a significant group of patients who have improvement. It’s very unexpected, especially when you look at the patients who entered the clinical trial who had a fair amount of active disease,” said Barry A. Singer, MD, director of The MS Center for Innovations in Care at Missouri Baptist Medical Center in St. Louis.
At the 7-year evaluation of patients in TOPAZ, the annualized relapse rate was 0.14. In addition, 87% of patients remained relapse-free in year 7. Dr. Singer and his colleagues also reported that 73% of TOPAZ participants were stable or improved based on their Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores.
“As we follow the data out and follow these patients out, we’re seeing how the clinical course for these patients is dramatically improving for the majority of patients,” Dr. Singer said in a video interview at ACTRIMS Forum 2018, the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
The TOPAZ study also revealed that 69% of patients were free of clinical disease worsening and 44% experienced clinical disease improvement in the 6 months before year 7. The majority also had no evidence of disease activity, Dr. Singer reported.
“One of the attributes that makes alemtuzumab so attractive as a clinician and for patients is you can go through a couple of series of medication [treatments] ... and really alter your disease course – that is the exciting thing,” he said.
The Food and Drug Administration approved alemtuzumab (Lemtrada) in November 2014 for the treatment of patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis. Use of alemtuzumab is generally reserved for patients who have had an inadequate response to two or more previous drugs indicated for the treatment of multiple sclerosis.
In CARE-MS II, participants received two annual courses of alemtuzumab: intravenous infusion of 12 mg/day for 5 days at baseline and again for 3 days at 12 months. Additional treatment in TOPAZ for relapse or MRI evidence of disease was at the discretion of the investigator and could include alemtuzumab retreatment 12 mg/day on 3 consecutive days 12 months or more after a previous course, or another disease-modifying therapy at any time. Annual follow-up exams included an MRI scan.
A durable treatment effect was achieved by a majority of patients, even though 47% received no further treatment with alemtuzumab or another disease-modifying therapy after the initial two alemtuzumab courses.
The incidence of most adverse events, including infusion-associated reactions and infections, decreased over the course of the TOPAZ study and were lower than the incidence reported in the 2-year CARE-MS II trial. Of note, the incidence of thyroid-related adverse events peaked in the third year of the follow-up and continued to decline out to 7 years, Dr. Singer said. “We’re not seeing any new safety issues.”
Dr. Singer and his coinvestigators plan to continue the research, monitoring and scoring patients over time.
The TOPAZ trial was funded by Sanofi Genzyme, which markets alemtuzumab. Dr. Singer disclosed that he receives clinical research support and is a speaker for Sanofi Genzyme.
SOURCE: Singer B et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P026.
SAN DIEGO – A majority of patients with active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and inadequate response to previous therapy achieved a durable response after treatment with alemtuzumab in the TOPAZ trial, a 5-year extension to the CARE-MS II study.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Almost half of the 317 participants in TOPAZ received no further therapy beyond their initial two courses of alemtuzumab infusion therapy that they received as part of the CARE-MS II study.
“If you follow patients over time ... you’re seeing a significant group of patients who have improvement. It’s very unexpected, especially when you look at the patients who entered the clinical trial who had a fair amount of active disease,” said Barry A. Singer, MD, director of The MS Center for Innovations in Care at Missouri Baptist Medical Center in St. Louis.
At the 7-year evaluation of patients in TOPAZ, the annualized relapse rate was 0.14. In addition, 87% of patients remained relapse-free in year 7. Dr. Singer and his colleagues also reported that 73% of TOPAZ participants were stable or improved based on their Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores.
“As we follow the data out and follow these patients out, we’re seeing how the clinical course for these patients is dramatically improving for the majority of patients,” Dr. Singer said in a video interview at ACTRIMS Forum 2018, the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
The TOPAZ study also revealed that 69% of patients were free of clinical disease worsening and 44% experienced clinical disease improvement in the 6 months before year 7. The majority also had no evidence of disease activity, Dr. Singer reported.
“One of the attributes that makes alemtuzumab so attractive as a clinician and for patients is you can go through a couple of series of medication [treatments] ... and really alter your disease course – that is the exciting thing,” he said.
The Food and Drug Administration approved alemtuzumab (Lemtrada) in November 2014 for the treatment of patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis. Use of alemtuzumab is generally reserved for patients who have had an inadequate response to two or more previous drugs indicated for the treatment of multiple sclerosis.
In CARE-MS II, participants received two annual courses of alemtuzumab: intravenous infusion of 12 mg/day for 5 days at baseline and again for 3 days at 12 months. Additional treatment in TOPAZ for relapse or MRI evidence of disease was at the discretion of the investigator and could include alemtuzumab retreatment 12 mg/day on 3 consecutive days 12 months or more after a previous course, or another disease-modifying therapy at any time. Annual follow-up exams included an MRI scan.
A durable treatment effect was achieved by a majority of patients, even though 47% received no further treatment with alemtuzumab or another disease-modifying therapy after the initial two alemtuzumab courses.
The incidence of most adverse events, including infusion-associated reactions and infections, decreased over the course of the TOPAZ study and were lower than the incidence reported in the 2-year CARE-MS II trial. Of note, the incidence of thyroid-related adverse events peaked in the third year of the follow-up and continued to decline out to 7 years, Dr. Singer said. “We’re not seeing any new safety issues.”
Dr. Singer and his coinvestigators plan to continue the research, monitoring and scoring patients over time.
The TOPAZ trial was funded by Sanofi Genzyme, which markets alemtuzumab. Dr. Singer disclosed that he receives clinical research support and is a speaker for Sanofi Genzyme.
SOURCE: Singer B et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P026.
SAN DIEGO – A majority of patients with active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and inadequate response to previous therapy achieved a durable response after treatment with alemtuzumab in the TOPAZ trial, a 5-year extension to the CARE-MS II study.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Almost half of the 317 participants in TOPAZ received no further therapy beyond their initial two courses of alemtuzumab infusion therapy that they received as part of the CARE-MS II study.
“If you follow patients over time ... you’re seeing a significant group of patients who have improvement. It’s very unexpected, especially when you look at the patients who entered the clinical trial who had a fair amount of active disease,” said Barry A. Singer, MD, director of The MS Center for Innovations in Care at Missouri Baptist Medical Center in St. Louis.
At the 7-year evaluation of patients in TOPAZ, the annualized relapse rate was 0.14. In addition, 87% of patients remained relapse-free in year 7. Dr. Singer and his colleagues also reported that 73% of TOPAZ participants were stable or improved based on their Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores.
“As we follow the data out and follow these patients out, we’re seeing how the clinical course for these patients is dramatically improving for the majority of patients,” Dr. Singer said in a video interview at ACTRIMS Forum 2018, the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
The TOPAZ study also revealed that 69% of patients were free of clinical disease worsening and 44% experienced clinical disease improvement in the 6 months before year 7. The majority also had no evidence of disease activity, Dr. Singer reported.
“One of the attributes that makes alemtuzumab so attractive as a clinician and for patients is you can go through a couple of series of medication [treatments] ... and really alter your disease course – that is the exciting thing,” he said.
The Food and Drug Administration approved alemtuzumab (Lemtrada) in November 2014 for the treatment of patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis. Use of alemtuzumab is generally reserved for patients who have had an inadequate response to two or more previous drugs indicated for the treatment of multiple sclerosis.
In CARE-MS II, participants received two annual courses of alemtuzumab: intravenous infusion of 12 mg/day for 5 days at baseline and again for 3 days at 12 months. Additional treatment in TOPAZ for relapse or MRI evidence of disease was at the discretion of the investigator and could include alemtuzumab retreatment 12 mg/day on 3 consecutive days 12 months or more after a previous course, or another disease-modifying therapy at any time. Annual follow-up exams included an MRI scan.
A durable treatment effect was achieved by a majority of patients, even though 47% received no further treatment with alemtuzumab or another disease-modifying therapy after the initial two alemtuzumab courses.
The incidence of most adverse events, including infusion-associated reactions and infections, decreased over the course of the TOPAZ study and were lower than the incidence reported in the 2-year CARE-MS II trial. Of note, the incidence of thyroid-related adverse events peaked in the third year of the follow-up and continued to decline out to 7 years, Dr. Singer said. “We’re not seeing any new safety issues.”
Dr. Singer and his coinvestigators plan to continue the research, monitoring and scoring patients over time.
The TOPAZ trial was funded by Sanofi Genzyme, which markets alemtuzumab. Dr. Singer disclosed that he receives clinical research support and is a speaker for Sanofi Genzyme.
SOURCE: Singer B et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P026.
REPORTING FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2018
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The annualized relapse rate was 0.14 at year 7 among the 87% of participants who remained in the TOPAZ study.
Study details: A 5-year extension study of 317 participants from the initial CARE-MS II trial.
Disclosures: The TOPAZ trial was funded by Sanofi Genzyme, which markets alemtuzumab. Dr. Singer disclosed that he receives clinical research support and is a speaker for Sanofi Genzyme.
Source: Singer B et al. ACTRIMS Forum 2018, abstract P026.
