Search

Introduction: Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) is increasingly used as treatment for patients with active multiple sclerosis (MS), typically after failure of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). A recent phase III trial, 'Multiple Sclerosis International Stem Cell Transplant, MIST', showed that aHSCT resulted in prolonged time to disability progression compared with DMTs in patients with relapsing remitting MS (RRMS). However, the MIST trial did not include many of the current high-efficacy DMTs (alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab or cladribine) in use in the UK within the control arm, which are now offered to patients with rapidly evolving severe MS (RES-MS) who are treatment naïve. There remain, therefore, unanswered questions about the relative efficacy and safety of aHSCT over these high-efficacy DMTs in these patient groups. The StarMS trial (Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation versus Alemtuzumab, Ocrelizumab, Ofatumumab or Cladribine in Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis) will assess the efficacy, safety and long-term impact of aHSCT compared with high-efficacy DMTs in patients with highly active RRMS despite the use of standard DMTs or in patients with treatment naïve RES-MS., Methods and Analysis: StarMS is a multicentre parallel-group rater-blinded randomised controlled trial with two arms. A total of 198 participants will be recruited from 19 regional neurology secondary care centres in the UK. Participants will be randomly allocated to the aHSCT arm or DMT arm in a 1:1 ratio. Participants will remain in the study for 2 years with follow-up visits at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months postrandomisation. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who achieve 'no evidence of disease activity' during the 2-year postrandomisation follow-up period in an intention to treat analysis. Secondary outcomes include efficacy, safety, cost-effectiveness and immune reconstitution of aHSCT and the four high-efficacy DMTs., Ethics and Dissemination: The study was approved by the Yorkshire and Humber-Leeds West Research Ethics Committee (20/YH/0061). Participants will provide written informed consent prior to any study specific procedures. The study results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and abstracts will be submitted to relevant national and international conferences., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN88667898., Competing Interests: Competing interests: GB, JP, KEMD, RG, KH, DPap, ER, CB, MG, OC, CC, GG, MK, CK, RN, DPal, AP, NS, ES, TdS, AV, SW, BS report no relevant competing interests. AC reports no relevant disclosures since 2017. RH reports attendance at paid advisory boards with Novartis, Biogen and Roche. CAY reports personal compensation for serving on scientific advisory boards, conference support or speaker honoraria from BMS, Biogen, Celgene, Cytokinetics, GW Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Roche and Teva. Pharmaceuticals. PAM reports grants from National Institute of Health Research, non-financial support from National Institute of Health Research, grants from Benaroya Research Institute and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Jasper Therapeutics, personal fees from Magenta Therapeutics, personal fees from Rubius Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. JAS declares consultancy for Jazz, Medac, Vertex and Kiadis., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT) is available for treatment of highly active multiple sclerosis (MS)., Objective: To compare the effectiveness of AHSCT vs fingolimod, natalizumab, and ocrelizumab in relapsing-remitting MS by emulating pairwise trials., Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative treatment effectiveness study included 6 specialist MS centers with AHSCT programs and international MSBase registry between 2006 and 2021. The study included patients with relapsing-remitting MS treated with AHSCT, fingolimod, natalizumab, or ocrelizumab with 2 or more years study follow-up including 2 or more disability assessments. Patients were matched on a propensity score derived from clinical and demographic characteristics., Exposure: AHSCT vs fingolimod, natalizumab, or ocrelizumab., Main Outcomes: Pairwise-censored groups were compared on annualized relapse rates (ARR) and freedom from relapses and 6-month confirmed Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score worsening and improvement., Results: Of 4915 individuals, 167 were treated with AHSCT; 2558, fingolimod; 1490, natalizumab; and 700, ocrelizumab. The prematch AHSCT cohort was younger and with greater disability than the fingolimod, natalizumab, and ocrelizumab cohorts; the matched groups were closely aligned. The proportion of women ranged from 65% to 70%, and the mean (SD) age ranged from 35.3 (9.4) to 37.1 (10.6) years. The mean (SD) disease duration ranged from 7.9 (5.6) to 8.7 (5.4) years, EDSS score ranged from 3.5 (1.6) to 3.9 (1.9), and frequency of relapses ranged from 0.77 (0.94) to 0.86 (0.89) in the preceding year. Compared with the fingolimod group (769 [30.0%]), AHSCT (144 [86.2%]) was associated with fewer relapses (ARR: mean [SD], 0.09 [0.30] vs 0.20 [0.44]), similar risk of disability worsening (hazard ratio [HR], 1.70; 95% CI, 0.91-3.17), and higher chance of disability improvement (HR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.71-4.26) over 5 years. Compared with natalizumab (730 [49.0%]), AHSCT (146 [87.4%]) was associated with marginally lower ARR (mean [SD], 0.08 [0.31] vs 0.10 [0.34]), similar risk of disability worsening (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.54-2.09), and higher chance of disability improvement (HR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.72-4.18) over 5 years. AHSCT (110 [65.9%]) and ocrelizumab (343 [49.0%]) were associated with similar ARR (mean [SD], 0.09 [0.34] vs 0.06 [0.32]), disability worsening (HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 0.61-5.08), and disability improvement (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.66-2.82) over 3 years. AHSCT-related mortality occurred in 1 of 159 patients (0.6%)., Conclusion: In this study, the association of AHSCT with preventing relapses and facilitating recovery from disability was considerably superior to fingolimod and marginally superior to natalizumab. This study did not find evidence for difference in the effectiveness of AHSCT and ocrelizumab over a shorter available follow-up time.

In carefully selected patients, autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is a safe, highly effective and cost-saving treatment modality for treatment-resistant, and potentially treatment-naïve, immune-mediated neurological disorders. Although the evidence base has been growing in the last decade, limited understanding has led to confusion, mistrust and increasing use of health tourism. In this article, we discuss what autologous HSCT is, which immune-mediated conditions can be treated with it, how to select patients, what are the expected outcomes and potential adverse effects, and how cost-effective this treatment is., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: We have read and understood the BMJ policy on declaration of interests and declare the following interests: Basil Sharrack and John Snowden were investigators on the MIST trial and are members of the Autoimmune Diseases Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Basil Sharrack, John Snowden, and Alasdair Coles are investigators on the StarMS trial. Jennifer Petrie is the trial manager for the StarMS trial.

Background: Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is an effective treatment for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) who have highly active disease, despite the use of standard disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). However, the optimal time for offering AHSCT to patients with 'aggressive' MS is yet to be established., Objectives: The objective was to explore the safety and efficacy of AHSCT as a first-line DMT in patients with 'aggressive' MS., Methods: All patients with 'aggressive' MS who received AHSCT as a first-line DMT in five European and North American centres were retrospectively evaluated., Results: Twenty patients were identified. The median interval between diagnosis and AHSCT was 5 (1-20) months. All had multiple poor prognostic markers with a median pre-transplant Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 5.0 (1.5-9.5). After a median follow-up of 30 (12-118) months, the median EDSS score improved to 2.0 (0-6.5, p  < 0.0001). No patient had further relapses. Three had residual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) disease activities in the first 6 months post-transplant, but no further new or enhancing lesions were observed in subsequent scans., Conclusion: AHSCT is safe and effective as a first-line DMT in inducing rapid and sustained remission in patients with 'aggressive' MS.

Secondary autoimmune diseases (2ndADs), most frequently autoimmune cytopenias (AICs), were first described after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) undertaken for malignant and hematological indications, occurred at a prevalence of ~5-6.5%, and were attributed to allogeneic immune imbalances in the context of graft versus host disease, viral infections, and chronic immunosuppression. Subsequently, 2ndADs were reported to complicate roughly 2-14% of autologous HSCTs performed for an autoimmune disease. Alemtuzumab in the conditioning regimen has been identified as a risk for development of 2ndADs after either allogeneic or autologous HSCT and is consistent with the high rates of 2ndADs when using alemtuzumab as monotherapy. Due to the significant consequences but variable incidence, depending on conditioning regimen, of 2ndADs and similarity in known immune reconstitution kinetics after autologous HSCT for autoimmune diseases and after alemtuzumab monotherapy, we propose that an imbalance between B and T lineage regeneration early after HSCT may underlie the pathogenesis of 2ndADs.

Objective: To estimate differences in treatment costs and health outcomes between non-myeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS)., Methods: We collected data on costs and reimbursements for patients who underwent HSCT for RRMS at Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago (USA) between January 2017 and January 2019. The costs of HSCT were compared against those for DMTs in the United States, obtained from the literature. We also conducted a literature review to interpret the cost comparisons in terms of disease control and patients' wellbeing defined as no evidence of disease activity (NEDA), neurologic disability by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), and quality of life by the short form SF-36, respectively., Results: Outside of the data, herein, no other studies on cost of HSCT for RRMS were found in the literature. HSCT mean total costs, based on our own hospital, were $85,184 (range $70,635 to $120,260). Mean revenue collected was $95,268 (range $16,544 to $173,204). In comparison, according to the literature, 2019 DMT costs in the USA ranged from $80,000 to $100,000 per year per patient. Compared to DMTs, studies of HSCT reported greater improvement in no evidence of disease activity, disability, and quality of life., Limitations: Costs of HSCT would be expected to vary by conditioning regimen utilized, patient selection, center experience, and regional variation. No cost data on other HSCT regimens or on the three most recently licensed DMTs, alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab, and cladribine, are available. Randomized trials for cost comparisons are missing and variations in HSCT designs, populations, and methodology preclude more precise cost estimates., Conclusion: Costs of non-myeloablative HSCT after which DMTs are indefinitely discontinued, are approximately the same cost as those for one year of prescription DMTs. Since DMTs assessed in this analysis are given on an ongoing basis, whilst HSCT is not, HSCT is expected to produce long-term cost-savings. When considered alongside the available clinical evidence, which suggests that HSCT may generate more health gains than DMTs, HSCT is likely to represent a cost-effective use of resources. Model-based health economic analyses are required to substantiate this conclusion., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

These updated EBMT guidelines review the clinical evidence, registry activity and mechanisms of action of haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in multiple sclerosis (MS) and other immune-mediated neurological diseases and provide recommendations for patient selection, transplant technique, follow-up and future development. The major focus is on autologous HSCT (aHSCT), used in MS for over two decades and currently the fastest growing indication for this treatment in Europe, with increasing evidence to support its use in highly active relapsing remitting MS failing to respond to disease modifying therapies. aHSCT may have a potential role in the treatment of the progressive forms of MS with a significant inflammatory component and other immune-mediated neurological diseases, including chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, neuromyelitis optica, myasthenia gravis and stiff person syndrome. Allogeneic HSCT should only be considered where potential risks are justified. Compared with other immunomodulatory treatments, HSCT is associated with greater short-term risks and requires close interspeciality collaboration between transplant physicians and neurologists with a special interest in these neurological conditions before, during and after treatment in accredited HSCT centres. Other experimental cell therapies are developmental for these diseases and patients should only be treated on clinical trials.

Purpose of Review: In this review, we summarize the recently published literature that demonstrates the efficacy and safety of autologous haematopoietic stem cell therapy (AHSCT) in multiple sclerosis (MS) and highlight the importance of supportive care required for the safe and well-tolerated delivery of AHSCT., Recent Findings: MS is an autoimmune inflammatory and degenerative disorder of the central nervous system (CNS). In the majority of patients, the illness runs a relapsing remitting course (RRMS), culminating in a secondary progressive phase with gradual accumulation of fixed disabilities. Currently available disease-modifying therapies suppress CNS inflammation but have a limited effect on preventing disease progression for which there remains no effective therapy. Over the last two decades, there has been increasing evidence that AHSCT is a highly effective therapeutic strategy for treatment-resistant inflammatory types of MS, especially RRMS. Concerns about the safety of AHSCT in MS, usually a nonlife-threatening disease, have previously limited its use. However, AHSCT can now be delivered safely with major long-term benefits because of increasing transplant centre experience, judicious patient selection and good supportive care., Summary: MS is currently the fastest growing indication for AHSCT in Europe. Supportive care before, during and after the transplant period is key to the successful delivery of AHSCT.

Purpose of Review: We summarise the current development of autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) in treating multiple sclerosis (MS) and discuss future directions for the general neurologist, transplant haematologist and oncologist., Recent Findings: AHSCT was initially performed to treat MS over 20 years ago. Over recent years, the evidence base has grown, especially in relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), with significant improvements in safety and efficacy through better patient selection, choice of transplant technique and increase in centre experience. AHSCT is now a treatment option in very carefully selected patients with severe, treatment-resistant RRMS. However, it is important for transplant haematologists and oncologists to work closely with specialist MS neurologists in patient selection, during transplant and in long-term follow-up of patients. Data should be registered into international transplant registries and, ideally, patients should be enrolled on prospective clinical trials in order to build the evidence base and refine transplant techniques.

Introduction: Autologous haematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) is an evolving treatment avenue in multiple sclerosis (MS), which may be highly effective in controlling disease activity and improving disability. However, AHCT is associated with intrinsic toxicities and risks compared with conventional therapies. With growing experience in patient selection and treatment delivery, AHCT is increasingly considered an option in patients with aggressive disease that's responding poorly to disease modifying therapy. Areas covered: This article provides an introduction to AHCT and looks at its development as a treatment for MS over the last 20 years. It also highlights potential mechanisms of action, patient selection, and future trends for this treatment approach. Expert opinion: Currently published data suggest that AHCT's use is associated with significant reduction in MS disease activity and marked improvement in disability when used in patients with highly active relapsing remitting disease. Its long term safety and efficacy have not been fully evaluated but as increasing clinical trial data are published, its use is likely to grow. Further randomised controlled studies are needed to compare AHCT with standard disease modifying therapies and to optimise transplant regimens. Mechanistic studies may provide potential markers for response and a better understanding of disease pathogenesis.

Background: Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is an effective treatment for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) who have highly active disease, despite the use of standard disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). However, the optimal time for offering AHSCT to patients with 'aggressive' MS is yet to be established. Objectives: The objective was to explore the safety and efficacy of AHSCT as a first-line DMT in patients with 'aggressive' MS. Methods: All patients with 'aggressive' MS who received AHSCT as a first-line DMT in five European and North American centres were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Twenty patients were identified. The median interval between diagnosis and AHSCT was 5 (1–20) months. All had multiple poor prognostic markers with a median pre-transplant Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 5.0 (1.5–9.5). After a median follow-up of 30 (12–118) months, the median EDSS score improved to 2.0 (0–6.5, p < 0.0001). No patient had further relapses. Three had residual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) disease activities in the first 6 months post-transplant, but no further new or enhancing lesions were observed in subsequent scans. Conclusion: AHSCT is safe and effective as a first-line DMT in inducing rapid and sustained remission in patients with 'aggressive' MS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]