The Efficacy of Natalizumab versus Fingolimod for Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review, Indirect Evidence from Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials and Meta-Analysis of Observational Head-to-Head Trials

. 2016 ; 11 (9) : e0163296. [epub] 20160929

Status Publisher Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium electronic-ecollection

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/pmid27684943

BACKGROUND: Although Fingolimod (FGD) and Natalizumab (NTZ) appear to be effective in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), they have never been directly compared in a randomized clinical trial (RCT). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We evaluated the comparative efficacy of FGD vs. NTZ using a meta-analytical approach. Data from placebo-controlled RCTs was used for indirect comparisons and observational data was utilized for head-to-head comparisons. We identified 3 RCTs (2498 patients) and 5 observational studies (2576 patients). NTZ was associated with a greater reduction in the 2-year annualized relapse rate (ARR; SMDindirect = -0.24;95% CI: from -0.44 to -0.04; p = 0.005) and with the probability of no disease activity at 2 years (ORindirect:1.82, 95% CI: from 1.05 to 3.15) compared to FGD, while no differences between the two therapies were found in the proportion of patients who remained relapse-free (ORindirect = 1.20;95% CI: from 0.84 to 1.71) and those with disability progression (ORindirect = 0.76;95% CI: from 0.48 to 1.21) at 2 years. In the analysis of observational data, we found no significant differences between NTZ and FGD in the 2-year ARR (SMD = -0.05; 95% CI: from -0.26 to 0.16), and 2-year disability progression (OR:1.08;95% CI: from 0.77 to 1.52). However, NTZ-treated patients were more likely to remain relapse-free at 2-years compared to FGD (OR: 2.19;95% CI: from 1.15 to 4.18; p = z0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Indirect analyses of RCT data and head-to-head comparisons of observational findings indicate that NTZ may be more effective than FGD in terms of disease activity reduction in patients with RRMS. However, head-to-head RCTs are required to independently confirm this preliminary observation.

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Tsivgoulis G, Katsanos AH, Grigoriadis N, Hadjigeorgiou GM, Heliopoulos I, Papathanasopoulos P, et al. The Effect of Disease Modifying Therapies on Disease Progression in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0144538 10.1371/journal.pone.0144538 PubMed DOI PMC

Freedman MS, Selchen D, Arnold DL, Prat A, Banwell B, Yeung M, et al. Treatment optimization in MS: Canadian MS Working Group updated recommendations. Can J Neurol Sci. 2013;40:307–23. 10.1017/s0317167100014244 PubMed DOI

Gajofatto A, Bacchetti P, Grimes B, High A, Waubant E. Switching first-line disease-modifying therapy after failure: impact on the course of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2009;15:50–8. 10.1177/1352458508096687 PubMed DOI

Torkildsen Ø, Myhr KM, Bø L. Disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis—a review of approved medications. Eur J Neurol. 2016;23 Suppl 1:18–27. 10.1111/ene.12883 PubMed DOI PMC

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62:e1–34. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 PubMed DOI

EMEA: Guideline on clinical investigation of medicinal products for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Doc. Ref. CPMP/EWP/561/98 Rev. 1, 16 November 2006

Sormani MP, Signori A, Siri P, De Stefano N. Time to first relapse as an endpoint in multiple sclerosis clinical trials. Mult Scler. 2013;19:466–74 10.1177/1352458512457841 PubMed DOI

Havrdova E, Galetta S, Hutchinson M, Stefoski D, Bates D, Polman CH, et al. Effect of natalizumab on clinical and radiological disease activity in multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of the Natalizumab Safety and Efficacy in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (AFFIRM) study. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:254–60. 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70021-3 PubMed DOI

Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1988. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Routledge.

Tsivgoulis G, Katsanos AH, Grigoriadis N, Hadjigeorgiou GM, Heliopoulos I, Papathanasopoulos P, et al. The effect of disease-modifying therapies on brain atrophy in patients with clinically isolated syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2015;8:193–202. 10.1177/1756285615600381 PubMed DOI PMC

Deeks JJ, Higgins JP, Altman DG. Chapter 9.4.6: Combining dichotomous and continuous outcomes. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.website. Available: http://handbook.cochrane.org/chapter_9/9_4_6_combining_dichotomous_and_continuous_outcomes.htm. Updated March 2011. Accessed February 23th, 2016.

Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT and Rothstein HR. Chapeter 19: Subgroup Analyses, in Introduction to Meta-Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK: 10.1002/9780470743386.ch19 DOI

Deeks JJ, Higgins JP, Altman DG. Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions website. Available: http://handbook.cochrane.org/chapter_9/9_analysing_data_and_undertaking_meta_analyses.htm. Updated March 2011. Accessed February 4th, 2014.

Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:683–91. 10.1016/s0895-4356(97)00049-8 PubMed DOI

Salanti G. Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple- treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis school. Research Synthesis Methods 2012;3:80–97. 10.1002/jrsm.1037 PubMed DOI

Polman CH, O'Connor PW, Havrdova E, Hutchinson M, Kappos L, Miller DH, et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2006; 354:899–910. 10.1056/NEJMoa044397 PubMed DOI

Kappos L, Radue EW, O'Connor P, Polman C, Hohlfeld R, Calabresi P, et al. A placebo-controlled trial of oral fingolimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:387–401. 10.1056/NEJMoa0909494 PubMed DOI

Calabresi PA, Radue EW, Goodin D, Jeffery D, Rammohan KW, Reder AT, et al. Safety and efficacy of fingolimod in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (FREEDOMS II): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Neurol. 2014; 13:545–56. 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70049-3 PubMed DOI

Barbin L, Rousseau C, Jousset N, Casey R, Debouverie M, Vukusic S, et al. Comparative efficacy of fingolimod vs natalizumab: A French multicenter observational study. Neurology. 2016;86:771–8. 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002395 PubMed DOI PMC

Braune S, Lang M, Bergmann A; NTC Study Group. Second line use of Fingolimod is as effective as Natalizumab in a German out-patient RRMS-cohort. J Neurol. 2013;260:2981–5. 10.1007/s00415-013-7082-0 PubMed DOI PMC

Gajofatto A, Bianchi MR, Deotto L, Benedetti MD. Are natalizumab and fingolimod analogous second-line options for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis? A clinical practice observational study. Eur Neurol. 2014;72:173–80. 10.1159/000361044 PubMed DOI

Kalincik T, Horakova D, Spelman T, Jokubaitis V, Trojano M, Lugaresi A, et al. Switch to natalizumab versus fingolimod in active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol. 2015;77:425–35. 10.1002/ana.24339 PubMed DOI

Koch-Henriksen N, Magyari M, Sellebjerg F, Soelberg Sørensen P. A comparison of multiple sclerosis clinical disease activity between patients treated with natalizumab and fingolimod. Mult Scler. 2016. April 7 pii: 1352458516643393. [Epub ahead of print] 10.1177/1352458516643393 PubMed DOI

Kappos L, De Stefano N, Freedman MS, Cree BA, Radue EW, Sprenger T, et al. Inclusion of brain volume loss in a revised measure of 'no evidence of disease activity' (NEDA-4) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2015. November 19 pii: 1352458515616701. [Epub ahead of print] 10.1177/1352458515616701 PubMed DOI PMC

Röver C, Nicholas R, Straube S, Friede T. Changing EDSS Progression in Placebo Cohorts in Relapsing MS: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0137052 10.1371/journal.pone.0137052 PubMed DOI PMC

Lavorgna L, Bonavita S, Ippolito D, Lanzillo R, Salemi G, Patti F, et al. Clinical and magnetic resonance imaging predictors of disease progression in multiple sclerosis: a nine-year follow-up study. Mult Scler. 2014;20:220–6. 10.1177/1352458513494958 PubMed DOI

Kappos L, Kuhle J, Multanen J, Kremenchutzky M, Verdun di Cantogno E, Cornelisse P, et al. Factors influencing long-term outcomes in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: PRISMS-15. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2015;86:1202–7. 10.1136/jnnp-2014-310024 PubMed DOI PMC

Sormani MP, Li DK, Bruzzi P, Stubinski B, Cornelisse P, Rocak S, et al. Combined MRI lesions and relapses as a surrogate for disability in multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 2011;77:1684–90. 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31823648b9 PubMed DOI

Uher T, Vaneckova M, Sobisek L, Tyblova M, Seidl Z, Krasensky J, et al. Combining clinical and magnetic resonance imaging markers enhances prediction of 12-year disability in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2016. April 6 pii: 1352458516642314. [Epub ahead of print] 10.1177/1352458516642314 PubMed DOI

Filippi M, Preziosa P, Rocca MA. Magnetic resonance outcome measures in multiple sclerosis trials: time to rethink? Curr Opin Neurol. 2014;27:290–9. 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000095 PubMed DOI

Harris JO, Frank JA, Patronas N, McFarlin DE, McFarland HF. Serial gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging scans in patients with early, relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: implications for clinical trials and natural history. Ann Neurol. 1991;29:548–55. 10.1002/ana.410290515 PubMed DOI

Bermel RA, Naismith RT. Using MRI to make informed clinical decisions in multiple sclerosis care. Curr Opin Neurol. 2015;28:244–9. 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000204 PubMed DOI

Losseff NA, Miller DH, Kidd D, Thompson AJ. The predictive value of gadolinium enhancement for long term disability in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis—preliminary results. Mult Scler. 2001;7:23–5. 10.1177/135245850100700105 PubMed DOI

Alroughani RA, Akhtar S, Ahmed SF, Al-Hashel JY. Clinical predictors of disease progression in multiple sclerosis patients with relapsing onset in a nation-wide cohort. Int J Neurosci. 2015;125:831–7. 10.3109/00207454.2014.976641 PubMed DOI

Rotstein DL, Healy BC, Malik MT, Chitnis T, Weiner HL. Evaluation of no evidence of disease activity in a 7-year longitudinal multiple sclerosis cohort. JAMA Neurol. 2015;72:152–8. 10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.3537 PubMed DOI

Stangel M, Penner IK, Kallmann BA, Lukas C, Kieseier BC. Towards the implementation of 'no evidence of disease activity' in multiple sclerosis treatment: the multiple sclerosis decision model. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2015;8:3–13. 10.1177/1756285614560733 PubMed DOI PMC

Frisell T, Forsberg L, Nordin N, Kiesel C, Alfredsson L, Askling J, et al. Comparative analysis of first-year fingolimod and natalizumab drug discontinuation among Swedish patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2016;22:85–93. 10.1177/1352458515579216 PubMed DOI

O'Day K, Meyer K, Stafkey-Mailey D, Watson C. Cost-effectiveness of natalizumab vs fingolimod for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: analyses in Sweden. J Med Econ. 2015;18:295–302. 10.3111/13696998.2014.991786 PubMed DOI

Gani R, Giovannoni G, Bates D, Kemball B, Hughes S, Kerrigan J. et al. Cost-effectiveness analyses of natalizumab (Tysabri) compared with other disease-modifying therapies for people with highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in the UK. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26:617–27. 10.2165/00019053-200826070-00008 PubMed DOI

Tramacere I, Del Giovane C, Salanti G, D'Amico R, Filippini G. Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;9: CD011381 10.1002/9780470743386.ch19 PubMed DOI PMC

Mavridis D, Giannatsi M, Cipriani A, Salanti G. A primer on network meta-analysis with emphasis on mental health. Evid Based Ment Health. 2015;18:40–6. 10.1136/eb-2015-102088 PubMed DOI PMC

Conway DS, Cohen JA. Natalizumab and fingolimod: insight into their relative efficacies in clinical practice. Mult Scler. 2014;20:1280–1. 10.1177/1352458514535283 PubMed DOI

Hauser SL, Johnston SC. Balancing risk and reward: the question of natalizumab. Ann Neurol. 2009;66:A7–8. 10.1002/ana.21873 PubMed DOI

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...