COMBAT-MS: A Population-Based Observational Cohort Study Addressing the Benefit-Risk Balance of Multiple Sclerosis Therapies Compared with Rituximab.
Journal
Annals of neurology
ISSN: 1531-8249
Titre abrégé: Ann Neurol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7707449
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Jun 2024
25 Jun 2024
Historique:
revised:
28
05
2024
received:
20
02
2024
accepted:
04
06
2024
medline:
26
6
2024
pubmed:
26
6
2024
entrez:
26
6
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
To assess comparative effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of off-label rituximab, compared with frequently used therapies approved for multiple sclerosis (MS). 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. 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. 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.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
ID : MS-1511-33196
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Annals of Neurology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Neurological Association.
Références
Filippi M, Bar‐Or A, Piehl F, et al. Multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2018;4:43.
Bjornevik K, Cortese M, Healy BC, et al. Longitudinal analysis reveals high prevalence of Epstein‐Barr virus associated with multiple sclerosis. Science 2022;375:296–301.
Piehl F. Current and emerging disease‐modulatory therapies and treatment targets for multiple sclerosis. J Intern Med 2021;289:771–791.
McGinley MP, Goldschmidt CH, Rae‐Grant AD. Diagnosis and treatment of multiple sclerosis: a review. JAMA 2021;325:765–779.
Hauser SL, Bar‐Or A, Comi G, et al. Ocrelizumab versus interferon Beta‐1a in relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2017;376:221–234.
Hauser SL, Bar‐Or A, Cohen JA, et al. Ofatumumab versus Teriflunomide in Multiple Sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2020;383:546–557.
Svenningsson A, Frisell T, Burman J, et al. Safety and efficacy of rituximab versus dimethyl fumarate in patients with relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis or clinically isolated syndrome in Sweden: a rater‐blinded, phase 3, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2022;21:693–703.
Greenfield AL, Hauser SL. B‐cell therapy for multiple sclerosis: entering an era. Ann Neurol 2018;83:13–26.
Luna G, Alping P, Burman J, et al. Infection risks among patients with multiple sclerosis treated with Fingolimod, Natalizumab, rituximab, and injectable therapies. JAMA Neurol 2020;77:184–191.
Ontaneda D, Tallantyre E, Kalincik T, et al. Early highly effective versus escalation treatment approaches in relapsing multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2019;18:973–980.
Granqvist M, Boremalm M, Poorghobad A, et al. Comparative effectiveness of rituximab and other initial treatment choices for multiple sclerosis. JAMA Neurol 2018;75:320–327.
Fox RJ, Mehta R, Pham T, et al. Real‐world disease‐modifying therapy pathways from administrative claims data in patients with multiple sclerosis. BMC Neurol 2022;22:211.
Alping P, Piehl F, Langer‐Gould A, et al. Validation of the Swedish multiple sclerosis register: further improving a resource for Pharmacoepidemiologic evaluations. Epidemiology 2019;30:230–233.
Ludvigsson JF, Andersson E, Ekbom A, et al. External review and validation of the Swedish national inpatient register. BMC Public Health 2011;11:450.
Wettermark B, Hammar N, Fored CM, et al. The new Swedish prescribed drug register—opportunities for pharmacoepidemiological research and experience from the first six months. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2007;16:726–735.
Alping P, Neovius M, Piehl F, Frisell T. Real‐world healthcare cost savings and reduced relapse rate with off‐label rituximab versus disease‐modifying treatments approved for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis: a Nationwide cost‐effectiveness study. Ann Neurol 2024;95:1099–1111.
Hobart J, Lamping D, Fitzpatrick R, et al. The multiple sclerosis impact scale (MSIS‐29): a new patient‐based outcome measure. Brain 2001;124:962–973.
Naimi AI, Whitcomb BW. Estimating risk ratios and risk differences using regression. Am J Epidemiol 2020;189:508–510.
Costelloe L, O'Rourke K, Kearney H, et al. The patient knows best: significant change in the physical component of the multiple sclerosis impact scale (MSIS‐29 physical). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2007;78:841–844.
Langer‐Gould A, Cheng SC, Li BH, et al. Kaiser Permanente Southern California multiple sclerosis specialist g. decreasing multiple sclerosis treatment expenditures and improving quality at the health system level. Ann Neurol 2022;92:164–172.
He A, Merkel B, Brown JWL, et al. Timing of high‐efficacy therapy for multiple sclerosis: a retrospective observational cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2020;19:307–316.
Brown JWL, Coles A, Horakova D, et al. Association of initial disease‐modifying therapy with later conversion to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. JAMA 2019;321:175–187.
Daruwalla C, Shaygannejad V, Ozakbas S, et al. Early non‐disabling relapses are important predictors of disability accumulation in people with relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2023;29:875–883.
Swedish MS Association. [05‐NOV‐2023]; Available from: https://www.mssallskapet.se/lakemedel/.
Confavreux C, Vukusic S. Age at disability milestones in multiple sclerosis. Brain 2006;129:595–605.
Manouchehrinia A, Westerlind H, Kingwell E, et al. Age related multiple sclerosis severity score: disability ranked by age. Mult Scler 2017;23:1938–1946.
Longinetti E, Englund S, Burman J, et al. Trajectories of cognitive processing speed and physical disability over 11 years following initiation of a first multiple sclerosis disease‐modulating therapy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2023;9:134–141.
Kalincik T, Diouf I, Sharmin S, et al. Effect of disease‐modifying therapy on disability in relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis over 15 years. Neurology 2021;96:e783–e797.
Lublin FD, Haring DA, Ganjgahi H, et al. How patients with multiple sclerosis acquire disability. Brain 2022;145:3147–3161.
Satyanarayan S, Cutter G, Krieger S, et al. The impact of relapse definition and measures of durability on MS clinical trial outcomes. Mult Scler 2023;29:568–575.
Knowles S, Middleton R, Cooze B, et al. Comparing the pathology, clinical, and demographic characteristics of younger and older‐onset multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2024;95:471–486.
Weideman AM, Tapia‐Maltos MA, Johnson K, et al. Meta‐analysis of the age‐dependent efficacy of multiple sclerosis treatments. Front Neurol 2017;8:577.
Kuhlmann T, Moccia M, Coetzee T, et al. Multiple sclerosis progression: time for a new mechanism‐driven framework. Lancet Neurol 2023;22:78–88.
Starvaggi Cucuzza C, Longinetti E, Ruffin N, et al. Sustained low relapse rate with highly variable B‐cell repopulation dynamics with extended rituximab dosing intervals in multiple sclerosis. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2022;10(1):e200056.
Claverie R, Perriguey M, Rico A, et al. Efficacy of rituximab outlasts B‐cell repopulation in multiple sclerosis: time to rethink dosing? Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2023;10(5):e200152.
Callaghan BC, Reynolds E, Banerjee M, et al. Out‐of‐pocket costs are on the rise for commonly prescribed neurologic medications. Neurology 2019;92:e2604–e2613.
Hartung DM, Johnston KA, Geddes J, Bourdette DN. Effect of generic glatiramer acetate on spending and use of drugs for multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2020;94:e1407–e1414.
Piehl F, Mathew T. Low‐dose rituximab should be used for treating MS in resource‐limited settings: yes. Mult Scler 2022;28:1028–1029.
WHO Model List of Essential Medicines—23rd list. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-MHP-HPS-EML-2023.02.
Alping P, Askling J, Burman J, et al. Cancer risk for Fingolimod, Natalizumab, and Rituximab in multiple sclerosis patients. Ann Neurol 2020;87:688–699.