1 / 25

Inflammation and Secondary Progressive MS: Trials of Immunosuppression & Immunomodulators

Inflammation and Secondary Progressive MS: Trials of Immunosuppression & Immunomodulators. Ruth Whitham, MD James Bowen, MD VA MS Center of Excellence-West. MS is an Inflammatory Disease. The Pathogenesis of MS May Involve Both Inflammation and Neurodegeneration. Detrimental inflammation.

osgood
Télécharger la présentation

Inflammation and Secondary Progressive MS: Trials of Immunosuppression & Immunomodulators

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Inflammation and Secondary Progressive MS: Trials of Immunosuppression & Immunomodulators Ruth Whitham, MD James Bowen, MD VA MS Center of Excellence-West CMSC, June 2004

  2. MS is an Inflammatory Disease CMSC, June 2004

  3. The Pathogenesis of MS May Involve Both Inflammation and Neurodegeneration CMSC, June 2004

  4. Detrimental inflammation Protective inflammation • Proinflammatory cytokines sustaining the recruitment of blood-borne macrophages (eg, interleukin 1α / β) • Myelinotoxic cytokines (eg, TNF-α via (TNFR1) • Macrophages stripping myelin lamella from axons thus blocking conduction • Myelin Specific CD4+ (and CD8+) effector T cells with a Th1-like profile • Complement-fixing antimyelin components antibodies • Proinflammatory cytokines favoring in situ apoptosis of infiltrating T cells (eg, interferon γ) • Proinflammatory cytokines stimulating remyelination (eg, TNF-α via TNFR2) • Macrophages phagocytosing myelin debris in situ • Encephalitogenic CD4+ T cells producing neurotrophins (eg, brain-derived neurotrophic factor) and PGE2 • Antioligodendrocyte antibodies Demyelination Remyelination Martino et al. Lancet Neurology. 2002; 1(8): 499-509 CMSC, June 2004

  5. IFN-Beta: Mechanisms of Action CMSC, June 2004

  6. Controlled Studies of -Interferons in SPMS European Study: Betaferon N=718: 2 years • 8 MIU SQ QOD vs placebo North American Study: Betaseron N=939: 3 years • 8 MIU SQ QOD vs 5 MIU/m2 (9.6 MIU) vs placebo SPECTRIMS: Rebif N=618: 3 years • 44 mcg vs 22 mcg tiw vs placebo IMPACT: Avonex N=436: 2 years • 60 mcg IM weekly vs placebo Lancet 1998; Neurology 2000; Neurology 2001; Neurology 2002 CMSC, June 2004

  7. Baseline Subject Characteristics for the Four Interferon Studies • Mean age: 41-48 (European younger, Avonex older) • MS Duration: 8-16 years (European shorter, Avonex longer) • SPMS Duration: 2-4 years (European shorter) • % of patients with pre-study relapses: 40-70% (European higher) • Entry EDSS: 5.1 – 5.4 (inclusion 3.0 (3.5) – 6.5) CMSC, June 2004

  8. Time to Confirmed Progression by EDSS • European Betaferon: Progression confirmed at3 mo. • NA Betaseron: Progression confirmed at 6 mo. • SPECTRIMS Rebif: Progression confirmed at 6 mo. MSFC Change from Baseline to Month 24 • IMPACT Avonex Primary Outcome Measures for the Four Studies CMSC, June 2004

  9. Primary Outcome Results for the Four Studies Primary Outcome Achieved • European Betaferon: 9-12 mo. delay in time to progression by EDSS • IMPACT Avonex: Decrease in MSFC from baseline to month 24 reduced by 40%; driven by 9HPT (No benefit on EDSS) Primary Outcome Not Achieved • NA Betaseron and SPECTRIMS Rebif • No difference from placebo in time to progression by EDSS Gender Effect Only in Rebif Study • Females showed delay in time to progression by EDSS at both doses compared to placebo CMSC, June 2004

  10. Secondary Outcomes Similar in the Four Interferon Studies Benefit for Relapse Measures • Reduced relapse rate and severity • Reduced number of subjects relapsing • Increased time to first relapse • Reduced steroids & hospitalizations Benefit for MRI Measures • Reduced Gd enhancement • Reduced cumulative number of new or enlarging T2 lesions • Reduced cumulative T2 lesion volume CMSC, June 2004

  11. CMSC, June 2004

  12. Mitoxantrone in SPMS • 12 mg/m2 (N = 60) vs 5 mg/m2 (N = 64) vs Placebo (N = 64) • EDSS 3-6, RRMS or SPMS, with EDSS decrease by at least 1 point/18 mos. • Composite outcome (EDSS, AI, Std Neuro exam, Time to 1st steroids, Time to 1st attack) positive p = 0.0001 Hartung HP, et al. Lancet 2002;360:2018-25 CMSC, June 2004

  13. Mitoxantrone in SPMS • ESSS worse by ≤ 1 = 25 vs 8% (-64%, p = 0.013) • Relapses 1.15 vs 0.42/yr (yr 1, p = 0.0001) • Relapses 0.85 vs 0.27/yr (yr 2, p = 0.0001) CMSC, June 2004

  14. Mitoxantrone in SPMS • Effects sustained for 3 years (1 yr post Tx) only for Std Neuro Exam. • Mean EDSS 4.45 (early) • 94/188 had SPMS CMSC, June 2004

  15. Glatiramer in SPMS • 106 (76 SPMS) progressive course EDSS = 2-6.5 • Glatiramer 15mg sq qd vs placebo • Trends for all outcome measures, but not statistically significant. • Little change in placebo groups. Bornstein MB, et al. 1982;11:317-319. CMSC, June 2004

  16. Methotrexate • 60 chronic progressive MS, EDSS 3-6.5 • MTX 7.5/wk vs placebo X 2 years. • Treatment failure • EDSS worse • AI worse • Box/Block test worse by ≤ 20% • 9HP worse by ≤ 20% Goodkin DE, et al. Ann Neurol 1995;37:30-40 CMSC, June 2004

  17. Methotrexate • Sustained treatment failure seen in 51.6% of MTX vs 82.8% of placebo • 9HP (p = 0.007) • BBT (p = 0.068) • EDSS (p = 0.205) • AI (p = ns) CMSC, June 2004

  18. Cyclophosphamide in SPMS • 490 pts (362 SPMS) decline 1 point on EDSS/1 yr. • 476 (348 SPMS) Rx with CYC 700 mg/m2/mo + MP 1gm X 1 year. • Endpoint: Compare relapse rate in year prior to Rx to year of Rx. Zephir H. J Neurol Sci. 2004;218:73-77. CMSC, June 2004

  19. Cyclophosphamide in SPMS • 0.81 relapse/yr before • 0.12 relapse/yr during first 6 months • 0.14 relapse/yr during first 12 months • 78.6% stable or improved EDSS at 12 mos. • However, retrospective, open label, not controlled Zephir H. J Neurol Sci. 2004;218:73-77. CMSC, June 2004

  20. Methylprednisolone • 108 SPMS • 500 vs 10 mg qd X3d methylprednisolone + 11 day oral taper q 8 wks X 2 years. • Sustained worsening on composite outcome measure (EDSS, AI, BBT, 9HP)38.9% vs 53.7% (p = 0.18) Goodkin DE, et al. Neurology 1998;51:239-45. CMSC, June 2004

  21. Methylprednisolone Low Dose High Dose P = 0.04 Goodkin DE, et al. Neurology 1998;51:239-45. CMSC, June 2004

  22. Natalizumab • 213: 71 placebo, 68 3mg/kg, 74 6 mg/kg • Monthly MRI X 6 months • SPMS 26 (37%), 21 (31%), 22 (30%) • New enhancing lesions • 5.4 placebo • 1.0 nat 3mg/kg (p = 0.005) • 2.0 nat 6 mg/kg (p = 0.08) CMSC, June 2004

  23. Other Treatments • Azathioprine • Cladribine • Plasma Exchange • IVIG • Total Lymphoid Irradiation • High Dose Immunotherapy (SCT) CMSC, June 2004

  24. Difficulties with SPMS Studies • Is all or part of SPMS a non-inflammatory disease? • Is SPMS one disease? • Studies have insufficient power. • Measurements of disability are insensitive to change (unchanging placebo groups) • Are measured changes clinically significant? CMSC, June 2004

  25. Conclusions • Currently available DMT’s and immunosuppressants probably primarily target inflammation • SPMS may be more likely to respond to currently available treatments if onset of progression is recent, there is a relapsing component, and MRI scan shows active disease • Effects of currently available DMT’s are more pronounced on relapse measures and MRI measures than on disease progression • Effects on disease progression are modest • There may be unintended negative consequences of suppressing inflammation in SPMS CMSC, June 2004

More Related