Search

Objective: To assess comparative effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of off-label rituximab, compared with frequently used therapies approved for multiple sclerosis (MS)., Methods: A Swedish cohort study of persons with relapsing-remitting MS, age 18 to 75 years at inclusion and with a first therapy start or a first therapy switch between 2011 and 2018. Low-dose rituximab was compared with MS-approved therapies. Primary outcomes were proportions with 12 months confirmed disability worsening and change in MS Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) scores, respectively. Secondary endpoints included relapses, therapy discontinuation, and serious adverse events. Analyses used an intention-to-treat approach and were adjusted for demographics, MS features, and health characteristics., Results: We included 2,449 participants as first therapy start and 2,463 as first therapy switch. Proportions with disability worsening at 3 years were 9.1% for rituximab as first therapy and 5.1% after therapy switch, with no differences to MS-approved comparators. Worsening on rituximab was mostly independent of relapses. MSIS-29 with rituximab at 3 years improved by 1.3/8.4 points (physical/psychological) for first disease-modifying therapy (DMT) and 0.4/3.6 for DMT switch, and was mostly similar across therapies. Rituximab had lower relapse rates and higher therapy persistence in both groups. The rate of hospital-treated infections was higher with rituximab after a therapy switch, but not as a first therapy., Interpretation: This population-based real-world cohort study found low rates of disability progression, mostly independent of relapses, and without significant differences between rituximab and MS-approved comparators. Rituximab led to lower rates of inflammatory activity and higher treatment persistence, but was associated with an increased rate of serious infections. ANN NEUROL 2024;96:678-693., (© 2024 The Author(s). Annals of Neurology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Neurological Association.)

Background: We analysed the COMparison Between All immunoTherapies for Multiple Sclerosis (NCT03193866), a Swedish nationwide observational study in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), to identify trajectories of processing speed and physical disability after disease-modulating therapy (DMT) start., Methods: Using a group-modelling approach, we assessed trajectories of processing speed with oral Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) and physical disability with Expanded Disability Status Scale, from first DMT start among 1645 patients with RRMS followed during 2011-2022. We investigated predictors of trajectories using group membership as a multinomial outcome and calculated conditional probabilities linking membership across the trajectories., Results: We identified 5 stable trajectories of processing speed: low SDMT scores (mean starting values=29.9; 5.4% of population), low/medium (44.3; 25.3%), medium (52.6; 37.9%), medium/high (63.1; 25.8%) and high (72.4; 5.6%). We identified 3 physical disability trajectories: no disability/stable (0.8; 26.8%), minimal disability/stable (1.6; 58.1%) and moderate disability (3.2; 15.1%), which increased to severe disability. Older patients starting interferons were more likely than younger patients starting rituximab to be on low processing speed trajectories. Older patients starting teriflunomide, with more than one comorbidity, and a history of pain treatment were more likely to belong to the moderate/severe physical disability trajectory, relative to the no disability one. There was a strong association between processing speed and physical disability trajectories., Conclusions: In this cohort of actively treated RRMS, patients' processing speed remained stable over the years following DMT start, whereas patients with moderate physical disability deteriorated in physical function. Nevertheless, there was a strong link between processing speed and disability after DMT start., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AF-H has received unrestricted funding from Biogen Idec, Pfizer, Orion Pharma and Celltrion, speaking honoraria from Merck and consulting fee from Roche and AstraZeneca. KF has received honoraria for serving on advisory boards for Biogen and Merck KGaA, and speaker’s fees from Biogen, Novartis and Merck KGaA. JH has received honoraria for serving on advisory boards for Biogen, Celgene, Sanofi-Genzyme, Merck KGaA, Novartis and Sandoz, and speaker’s fees from Biogen, Novartis, Merck, KGaA, Teva and Sanofi-Genzyme, and he has served as PI for projects, or received unrestricted research support from, Biogen, Celgene, Merck KGaA, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi-Genzyme. AML-G receives grant support and awards from the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the National MS Society; she currently serves as a voting member on the California Technology Assessment Forum, a core program of the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER); she has received sponsored and reimbursed travel from ICER and the National Institutes of Health. PN has received travel support from Bayer Schering Pharma, Merck Serono, Biogen and Genzyme a Sanofi Company, honoraria for lectures and advisory boards from Merck Serono and Genzyme a Sanofi Company, advisory boards for Novartis and Roche, lectures for Biogen and has received unrestricted grants from Biogen. JL has received travel support and/or lecture honoraria from Biogen, Novartis, Merck, Alexion, BMS, Celgene, Janssen and Sanofi Genzyme; has served on scientific advisory boards for Almirall, Teva, Biogen, Novartis, Merck, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme and BMS; serves on the editorial board of the Acta Neurologica Scandinavica; and has received unconditional research grants from Biogen and Novartis, and financial support from Sanofi for an investigator-initiated study. JS has received consultancy fees paid to the institution by Mabion S.A. FP has received research grants from Janssen, Merck KGaA and UCB, and fees for serving as Chair of DMC in clinical trials with Chugai, Lundbeck and Roche, and preparation of witness statement for Novartis. TO has received compensation for advisory boards/lectures and unrestricted MS research grants from Biogen, Merck, Novartis and Sanofi., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: B-cell depleting therapies are highly efficacious in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis but one such therapy, rituximab, is not approved for multiple sclerosis and no phase 3 trial data are available. We therefore examined the safety and efficacy of rituximab compared with dimethyl fumarate in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis to obtain data that might allow inclusion of rituximab in treatment guidelines., Methods: RIFUND-MS was a multicentre, rater-blinded, active-comparator, phase 3, randomised controlled trial done at 17 Swedish university and community hospitals. Key inclusion criteria for participants were: age 18-50 years; relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis or clinically isolated syndrome according to prevailing McDonald criteria; 10 years or less since diagnosis; untreated or only exposed to interferons or glatiramer acetate; and with clinical or neuroradiological disease activity in the past year. Patients were automatically randomly assigned (1:1) by the treating physician using a randomisation module in the Swedish multiple sclerosis registry, without stratification, to oral dimethyl fumarate 240 mg twice daily or to intravenous rituximab 1000 mg followed by 500 mg every 6 months. Relapse evaluation, Expanded Disability Status Scale rating, and assessment of MRI scans were done by examining physicians and radiologists masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with at least one relapse (defined as subacute onset of new or worsening neurological symptoms compatible with multiple sclerosis with a duration of more than 24 h and preceded by at least 30 days of clinical stability), assessed in an intention-to-treat analysis using log-binomial regression with robust standard errors. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02746744., Findings: Between July 1, 2016, and Dec 18, 2018, 322 patients were screened for eligibility, 200 of whom were randomly assigned to a treatment group (100 assigned to rituximab and 100 assigned to dimethyl fumarate). The last patient completed 24-month follow-up on April 21, 2021. 98 patients in the rituximab group and 97 patients in the dimethyl fumarate group were eligible for the primary outcome analysis. Three (3%) patients in the rituximab group and 16 (16%) patients in the dimethyl fumarate group had a protocol-defined relapse during the trial, corresponding to a risk ratio of 0·19 (95% CI 0·06-0·62; p=0·0060). Infusion reactions (105 events [40·9 per 100 patient-years]) in the rituximab group and gastrointestinal reactions (65 events [47·4 per 100 patient-years]) and flush (65 events [47·4 per 100 patient-years]) in the dimethyl fumarate group were the most prevalent adverse events. There were no safety concerns., Interpretation: RIFUND-MS provides evidence that rituximab given as 1000 mg followed by 500 mg every 6 months is superior to dimethyl fumarate in preventing relapses over 24 months in patients with early relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Health economic and long-term safety studies of rituximab in patients with multiple sclerosis are needed., Funding: Swedish Research Council., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AS has served on the data safety monitoring board of GeNeuro. JS has received institutional consultancy fees from Mabion SA. MA has received compensation for lectures or advisory boards from Biogen, Novartis, and Genzyme. JM has received honoraria for advisory boards from Sanofi Genzyme and Merck and lecture honoraria from Merck. FP has received research grants from Janssen, Merck, and UCB, and fees for serving on data monitoring committees in clinical trials with Chugai, Lundbeck, and Roche. JL has received travel support or lecture honoraria from Biogen, Novartis, Merck, Roche, Axelion, Sanofi, and BMS; has served on scientific advisory boards for Almirall, Biogen, Novartis, Merck, Roche, BMS, and Sanofi; serves on the editorial board of the Acta Neurologica Scandinavica; and has received unconditional research grants from Biogen and Novartis. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Obesity early in life has been linked to increased risk of developing multiple sclerosis (MS). Leptin and insulin are both associated with obesity, making them suitable candidates for investigating this connection., Objective: To determine if leptin and insulin are risk factors for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS)., Methods: In this nested case-control study using blood samples from Swedish biobanks, we compared concentrations of leptin and insulin in 649 individuals who later developed RRMS with 649 controls matched for biobank, sex, age and date of sampling. Only pre-symptomatically drawn samples from individuals below the age of 40 years were included. Conditional logistic regression was performed on z -scored values to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: A 1-unit leptin z -score increase was associated with increased risk of MS in individuals younger than 20 years (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.1-1.9) and in all men (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.0-2.0). In contrast, for women aged 30-39 years, there was a lower risk of MS with increased leptin levels (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.54-1.0) when adjusting for insulin levels., Conclusion: We show that the pro-inflammatory adipokine leptin is a risk factor for MS among young individuals.

Background: Population-based real-world evidence studies of the effectiveness and tolerability of dimethyl fumarate in relation to common treatment alternatives are still limited., Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and tolerability of dimethyl fumarate (DMF) as the initial and secondary treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients compared with common treatment alternatives in Sweden., Methods: We conducted a nationwide retrospective observational cohort study of all RRMS patients identified through the Swedish MS registry initiating DMF ( n  = 641) or interferons/glatiramer acetate (IFN/GA; n  = 555) as the initial therapy, or DMF ( n  = 703) or fingolimod (FGL; n  = 194) after switch from IFN/GA between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016., Results: The discontinuation rate was lower with DMF as the initial treatment than IFN/GA (adjusted hazard rate (HR): 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.37-0.58, p  < 0.001), but higher than FGL as the secondary treatment (HR: 1.51, CI: 1.08-2.09, p  < 0.05). Annualized relapse rate (ARR) was lower with DMF compared to IFN/GA (0.04, CI: 0.03-0.06 vs 0.10, CI: 0.07-0.13; p  < 0.05), but not FGL (0.03, CI: 0.02-0.05 vs 0.02, CI: 0.01-0.04; p  = 0.41). Finally, time to first relapse (TTFR) was longer with DMF as the initial, but not secondary, therapy ( p  < 0.05 and p  = 0.20, respectively)., Conclusion: Our findings indicate that DMF performs better than IFN/GA as the initial treatment for RRMS. Compared to FGL, DMF displayed a lower tolerability, but largely similar effectiveness outcomes.

Importance: Although highly effective disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis (MS) have been associated with an increased risk of infections vs injectable therapies interferon beta and glatiramer acetate (GA), the magnitude of potential risk increase is not well established in real-world populations. Even less is known about infection risk associated with rituximab, which is extensively used off-label to treat MS in Sweden., Objective: To examine the risk of serious infections associated with disease-modifying treatments for MS., Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide register-based cohort study was conducted in Sweden from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2017. National registers with prospective data collection from the public health care system were used. All Swedish patients with relapsing-remitting MS whose data were recorded in the Swedish MS register as initiating treatment with rituximab, natalizumab, fingolimod, or interferon beta and GA and an age-matched and sex-matched general population comparator cohort were included., Exposures: Treatment with rituximab, natalizumab, fingolimod, and interferon beta and GA., Main Outcomes and Measures: Serious infections were defined as all infections resulting in hospitalization. Additional outcomes included outpatient treatment with antibiotic or herpes antiviral medications. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated in Cox regressions., Results: A total of 6421 patients (3260 taking rituximab, 1588 taking natalizumab, 1535 taking fingolimod, and 2217 taking interferon beta/GA) were included, plus a comparator cohort of 42 645 individuals. Among 6421 patients with 8600 treatment episodes, the mean (SD) age at treatment start ranged from 35.0 (10.1) years to 40.4 (10.6) years; 6186 patients were female. The crude rate of infections was higher in patients with MS taking interferon beta and GA than the general population (incidence rate, 8.9 [95% CI, 6.4-12.1] vs 5.2 [95% CI, 4.8-5.5] per 1000 person-years), and higher still in patients taking fingolimod (incidence rate, 14.3 [95% CI, 10.8-18.5] per 1000 person-years), natalizumab (incidence rate, 11.4 [95% CI, 8.3-15.3] per 1000 person-years), and rituximab (incidence rate, 19.7 [95% CI, 16.4-23.5] per 1000 person-years). After confounder adjustment, the rate remained significantly higher for rituximab (HR, 1.70 [95% CI, 1.11-2.61]) but not fingolimod (HR, 1.30 [95% CI, 0.84-2.03]) or natalizumab (HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.71-1.77]) compared with interferon beta and GA. In contrast, use of herpes antiviral drugs during rituximab treatment was similar to that of interferon beta and GA and lower than that of natalizumab (HR, 1.82 [1.34-2.46]) and fingolimod (HR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.27-2.32])., Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with MS are at a generally increased risk of infections, and this differs by treatment. The rate of infections was lowest with interferon beta and GA; among newer treatments, off-label use of rituximab was associated with the highest rate of serious infections. The different risk profiles should inform the risk-benefit assessments of these treatments.

Objective: The main objective of this study was to evaluate the axonal component neurofilament light protein (NFL) in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) as an outcome measure in a clinical trial on disease-modifying treatments in multiple sclerosis., Materials and Methods: Seventy-five patients with clinically stable relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) participating in the clinical trial "Switch-To RItuXimab in MS" (STRIX-MS) were switched to rituximab from first-line injectable therapy and then followed up for 2 years. Thirty patients from the extension trial (STRIX-MS extension), accepting repeated lumbar punctures, were followed up for an additional 3 years. Plasma and CSF samples were collected yearly during the follow-up. NFL concentration in plasma was measured by an in-house NF-light assay on the Simoa platform with a Homebrew kit. NFL concentration in CSF was measured by sandwich ELISA., Results: The mean levels of NFL, in both CSF and plasma, were low. The reduction of CSF-NFL was 25% during the first year of follow-up (from a mean of 471 [SD 393] to 354 [SD 174] pg/mL; P = 0.006) and was statistically significant. The corresponding reduction in plasma NFL was 18% (from 9.73 [SD 7.04] to 7.94 [SD 3.10] pg/mL; P = 0.055) and did not reach statistical significance., Conclusion: This study indicates that NFL in plasma is less sensitive as an endpoint in group comparisons than NFL in CSF. Given that plasma NFL is far easier to access, it is a promising and awaited method but further studies are needed to optimize the use in clinical trials., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To investigate changes in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) immunological profile after treatment switch from first-line injectables to rituximab in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), and to compare the profile in MS patients with healthy controls (HC)., Method: Cerebrospinal fluid from 70 patients with clinically stable RRMS and 55 HC was analysed by a multiplex electrochemiluminescence method for a broad panel of cytokines and immunoactive substances before, and over a two-year period after, treatment switch to rituximab. After quality assessment of data, using a predefined algorithm, 14 analytes were included in the final analysis., Results: Ten of the 14 analytes differed significantly in MS patients compared with HC at baseline. Levels of IP-10 (CXCL10), IL-12/23p40, IL-6, sVCAM1, IL-15, sICAM1 and IL-8 (CXCL8) decreased significantly after treatment switch to rituximab. The cytokines IP-10 and IL-12/IL-23p40 displayed the largest difference versus HC at baseline and also the largest relative reduction after therapy switch to rituximab., Conclusion: We found significant changes in the immunological profile after therapy switch to rituximab in RRMS in the direction towards the values of HC. IP-10 and IL12/IL-23p40 deserve further studies as part of the immunopathogenesis of MS as well as for the mode of action of rituximab in MS.

Objective: New disease-modifying treatment strategies in multiple sclerosis offer possibilities for individualised treatment. In this study, we evaluated patient-reported outcome measures before and after a switch in therapy from first-line injectable treatments to rituximab., Method: A total of 75 patients with clinically stable relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) receiving ongoing first-line injectable treatment at three Swedish centres had their treatment switched to rituximab in this open-label phase II multicentre study. Assessment of treatment satisfaction, patient-perceived impact of the disease on daily life, fatigue, cognitive symptoms and disease progression was performed 3 months before and at the time of the treatment shift and then for a subsequent 2-year period., Results: The overall treatment satisfaction rating improved significantly from a mean of 4.8 (scale range: 1-7), while on injectable therapies, to a mean of 6.3 after 1 year of rituximab treatment ( p < 0.001). This improvement was sustained after 2 years. There was no significant change in scores for patient-perceived impact of disease, fatigue or disease progression., Conclusion: A shift in therapy from first-line injectables to rituximab in a cohort of clinically stable RRMS patients was followed by improved treatment satisfaction. This is clinically relevant as it may influence long-term adherence to immunomodulating therapy.

Objective: To describe the effects of switching treatment from ongoing first-line injectable therapies to rituximab on inflammatory activity measured by MRI and levels of CSF neurofilament light chain (CSF-NFL) in a cohort of patients with clinically stable relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS)., Method: Seventy-five patients with clinically stable RRMS treated with the first-line injectables interferon-β (IFN-β) and glatiramer acetate (GA) at 3 Swedish centers were switched to rituximab in this open-label phase II multicenter study. After a run-in period of 3 months, 2 IV doses of 1,000 mg rituximab were given 2 weeks apart followed by repeated clinical assessment, MRI, and CSF-NFL for 24 months., Results: The mean cumulated number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions per patient at months 3 and 6 after treatment shift to rituximab was reduced compared to the run-in period (0.028 vs 0.36, p = 0.029). During the first year after treatment shift, the mean number of new or enlarged T2 lesions per patient was reduced (0.01 vs 0.28, p = 0.004) and mean CSF-NFL levels were reduced by 21% (p = 0.01)., Conclusions: For patients with RRMS, a treatment switch from IFN or GA to rituximab is associated with reduced inflammatory activity measured by MRI and CSF-NFL., Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class IV evidence that rituximab has an equal or superior effect in reducing inflammatory activity in RRMS measured by MRI and CSF-NFL compared to first-line injectables during the first year after treatment shift., (© 2016 American Academy of Neurology.)

Objective: The impact of present disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) in multiple sclerosis (MS) on nerve injury and reactive astrogliosis is still unclear. Therefore, we studied the effect of natalizumab treatment on the release of 2 brain-specific tissue damage markers into cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in MS patients., Methods: CSF samples from 92 patients with relapsing forms of MS were collected in a prospective manner prior to natalizumab treatment and after 6 or 12 months. In 86 cases, natalizumab was used as second-line DMT due to breakthrough of disease activity. The levels of neurofilament light (NFL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) were determined using highly sensitive in-house developed enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays., Results: Natalizumab treatment led to a 3-fold reduction of NFL levels, from a mean value of 1,300 (standard deviation [SD], 2,200) to 400 (SD, 270) ng/l (p < 0.001). The later value was not significantly different from that found in healthy control subjects (350 ng/l; SD, 170; n = 28). Subgroup analysis revealed a consistent effect on NFL release, regardless of previous DMT or whether patients had relapses or were in remission within 3 months prior to natalizumab treatment. No differences between pre- and post-treatment levels of GFAP were detected., Interpretation: Our data demonstrate that natalizumab treatment reduces the accumulation of nerve injury in relapsing forms of MS. It is anticipated that highly effective anti-inflammatory treatment can reduce axonal loss, thereby preventing development of permanent neurological disability., (Copyright © 2010 American Neurological Association.)