Successful treatment of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy with recombinant interleukin-7 and maraviroc in a patient with idiopathic CD4 lymphocytopenia.

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is a rapidly progressive, often fatal viral infection of the brain without a known treatment. Recently, case reports have demonstrated survival from PML with therapies that improve cell-mediated immunity, including interleukin-7 (IL-7) or the chemokine receptor type 5 (CCR5) antagonist, maraviroc (MVC). We present the first known case of a patient with PML successfully treated with both IL-7 and MVC. A 63-year-old woman presented to our center with a 6-month history of progressive left hemiparesis. Extensive laboratory testing was negative except for a severe CD4 lymphocytopenia (140/µL). Serial brain MRIs done prior to presentation revealed an enlarging, non-enhancing T2-hyperintense lesion in the right fronto-parietal white matter. PML was confirmed through detection of the JC virus by PCR in the cerebrospinal fluid and by brain biopsy, and she was started on mirtazapine and mefloquine. She continued to deteriorate and was then given a course of recombinant IL-7. Though she remained clinically stable after IL-7 treatment and serum JCV PCR decreased from 1000 copies/mL to a nadir of 238 copies/mL, a repeat MRI 3 months later showed lesion enlargement. MVC was then initiated. Now, more than 2 years after initial presentation, she remains stable and serum JCV PCR is undetectable. This case demonstrates successful treatment of PML in a patient with idiopathic CD4 lymphocytopenia and highlights the potential benefits of IL-7 and MVC in the treatment of PML. Treatment with IL-7 and MVC led to clinical stability and improvement in JC virus titers.

Baseline EDSS proportions in MS clinical trials affect the overall outcome and power: A cautionary note.

BACKGROUND: In randomized clinical trials, when treatments do not work equally effectively across stratifications of participants, observed event rates may differ from those hypothesized leading to deviations in estimated power. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of distributions of baseline Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) proportions in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) on the trial outcome, confirmed disability progression rate (CDPR), and power. METHODS: We reported CDPRs in the CombiRx trial by baseline EDSS and by groups (1st (0, 1), 2nd (1.5, 2), 3rd (2.5, 3), and 4th (⩾3.5)) and investigated the effect of different combinations of baseline EDSS proportions on the trial outcome and power. RESULTS: There were 244 (25.4%) participants in the 1st group, 368 (38.4%) in the 2nd group, 223 (23.3%) in the 3rd group, and 124 (12.9%) in the 4th group with CDPRs of 40.1%, 13.9%, 11.2%, and 16.9%, respectively. Both CDPR and power increased when the proportion of the 1st group increased in hypothetical trials with equal sample sizes in each arm, and a 10% increase in the 1st group led to a 5% increase in power. CONCLUSION: Various baseline EDSS proportions yielded different CDPRs and power, suggesting caution in interpretation of treatment effects across trials that enrolled participants with different proportions of baseline EDSS.

Randomized study combining interferon and glatiramer acetate in multiple sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: A double-blind, randomized, controlled study was undertaken to determine whether combined use of interferon ß-1a (IFN) 30 µg intramuscularly weekly and glatiramer acetate (GA) 20 mg daily is more efficacious than either agent alone in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. METHODS: A total of 1,008 participants were randomized and followed until the last participant enrolled completed 3 years. The primary endpoint was reduction in annualized relapse rate utilizing a strict definition of relapse. Secondary outcomes included time to confirmed disability, Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) score, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) metrics. RESULTS: Combination IFN+GA was not superior to the better of the single agents (GA) in risk of relapse. Both the combination therapy and GA were significantly better than IFN in reducing the risk of relapse. The combination was not better than either agent alone in lessening confirmed Expanded Disability Status Scale progression or change in MSFC over 36 months. The combination was superior to either agent alone in reducing new lesion activity and accumulation of total lesion volumes. In a post hoc analysis, combination therapy resulted in a higher proportion of participants attaining disease activity-free status (DAFS) compared to either single arm, driven by the MRI results. INTERPRETATION: Combining the 2 most commonly prescribed therapies for multiple sclerosis did not produce a significant clinical benefit over 3 years. An effect was seen on some MRI metrics. In a test of comparative efficacy, GA was superior to IFN in reducing the risk of exacerbation. The extension phase for CombiRx will address whether the observed differences in MRI and DAFS findings predict later clinical differences.

Recruitment of participants to a multiple sclerosis trial: the CombiRx experience.

BACKGROUND: and purpose Participant recruitment is central to all clinical trials. Any delay in recruitment affects the completion and ultimate success of the trial. We report our experience with patient screening and randomization in CombiRx, which may inform the design of other trials. CombiRx was a multicenter, phase III, double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing the combined use of interferon beta-1a and glatiramer acetate to either agent alone in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). This trial was launched in January 2005 in 69 centers in the United States and Canada under a co-operative agreement with the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS). The goal was to recruit 1000 patients over 1.5 years after a 6-month start-up period. Instead, the investigators required 4.25 years to enroll 1008 patients. METHODS: During this trial, we assessed the effectiveness of various recruitment strategies, utility of rescreening prior screen failures, and potential factors and strategies used in study conduct, research, and infrastructure, all of which affected recruitment of participants and ultimately time to completion of CombiRx. We particularly were interested in the variability in time to site initiation between academic centers and private practice sites. RESULTS: Physicians who were directly involved in the medical care of patients with RRMS were the primary source of patients recruited to CombiRx. A flexible study design that allowed for rescreening of the initial screen failures after a period of time was useful due to the relapsing/remitting course of the disease. Academic centers took longer to implement the trial than the private practice centers, but once sites were approved for enrollment, there was no important difference in the number of participants enrolled. LIMITATIONS: The CombiRx trial was conducted during a period when multiple new medications were being tested, thus affecting the pace of recruitment and limiting ability to generalize our experiences. However, the lessons we learned about process are relevant. CONCLUSION: Participants can be enrolled successfully in a clinical trial for RRMS, but factors affecting the time to achieve the requirements needed to start screening can be unpredictable and problematic. Prospective planning by the sponsors and investigators, use of central institutional review boards (IRBs), master trial agreements and secure remote desktop access to the trial database may expedite trial implementation and participant recruitment. A good scientific research question with flexible study design and active involvement of the clinicians are important factors driving recruitment. Clinical trials can be implemented successfully both in private practices and at academic centers, a consideration when selecting sites.

Risk of new disease activity in patients with multiple sclerosis who continue or discontinue disease-modifying therapies (DISCOMS): a multicentre, randomised, single-blind, phase 4, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis typically has onset in young adults and new disease activity diminishes with age. Most clinical trials of disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis have not enrolled individuals older than 55 years. Observational studies suggest that risk of return of disease activity after discontinuation of a disease-modifying therapies is greatest in younger patients with recent relapses or MRI activity. We aimed to determine whether risk of disease recurrence in older patients with no recent disease activity who discontinue disease-modifying therapy is increased compared to those who remain on disease-modifying therapy. METHODS: DISCOMS was a multicentre, randomised, controlled, rater-blinded, phase 4, non-inferiority trial. Individuals with multiple sclerosis of any subtype, 55 years or older, with no relapse within the past 5 years or new MRI lesion in the past 3 years while continuously taking an approved disease-modifying therapy were enrolled at 19 multiple sclerosis centres in the USA. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1 by site) with an interactive response technology system to either continue or discontinue disease-modifying therapy. Relapse assessors and MRI readers were masked to patient assignment; patients and treating investigators were not masked. The primary outcome was percentage of individuals with a new disease event, defined as a multiple sclerosis relapse or a new or expanding T2 brain MRI lesion, over 2 years. We assessed whether discontinuation of disease-modifying therapy was non-inferior to continuation using a non-inferiority, intention-to-treat analysis of all randomly assigned patients, with a predefined non-inferiority margin of 8%. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03073603, and is completed. FINDINGS: 259 participants were enrolled between May 22, 2017, and Feb 3, 2020; 128 (49%) were assigned to the continue group and 131 (51%) to the discontinue group. Five participants were lost to follow-up (continue n=1, discontinue n=4). Six (4·7%) of 128 participants in the continue group and 16 (12·2%) of 131 in the discontinue group had a relapse or a new or expanding brain MRI lesion within 2 years. The difference in event rates was 7·5 percentage points (95% CI 0·6-15·0). Similar numbers of participants had adverse events (109 [85%] of 128 vs 104 [79%] of 131) and serious adverse events (20 [16%] vs 18 [14%]), but more adverse events (422 vs 347) and serious adverse events (40 vs 30) occurred in the discontinue group. The most common adverse events were upper respiratory infections (20 events in 19 [15%] participants in the continue group and 37 events in 30 [23%] participants in the discontinue group). Three participants in the continue group and four in the discontinue group had treatment-related adverse events, of which one in each group was a serious adverse event (multiple sclerosis relapse requiring admission to hospital). One participant in the continue group and two in the discontinue group died; no deaths were deemed to be related to treatment. INTERPRETATION: We were unable to reject the null hypothesis and could not conclude whether disease-modifying therapy discontinuation is non-inferior to continuation in patients older than 55 years with multiple sclerosis and no recent relapse or new MRI activity. Discontinuation of disease-modifying therapy might be a reasonable option in patients older than 55 years who have stable multiple sclerosis, but might be associated with a small increased risk of new MRI activity. FUNDING: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and the National Multiple Sclerosis Society.

Long-term follow-up of a randomized study of combination interferon and glatiramer acetate in multiple sclerosis: Efficacy and safety results up to 7 years.

BACKGROUND: To report the long-term results of the blinded extension phase of the randomized, controlled study of the combined use of interferon beta-1a (IFN) 30µg IM weekly and glatiramer acetate (GA) 20mg daily compared to each agent alone in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). METHODS: 1008 RRMS patients were followed on protocol until the last participant enrolled completed 3 years, allowing some subjects to be followed for up to 7 years. The primary endpoint was reduction in annualized relapse rate. Secondary outcomes included time to confirmed disability, Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) score and MRI metrics. RESULTS: Similar to the core study, combination IFN + GA was not superior to the better of the single agents (GA) in risk of relapse. Both the combination therapy and GA were significantly better than IFN in reducing the risk of relapse. The combination was not better than either agent alone in lessening confirmed EDSS worsening or change in MSFC. Also similar to the core result, the combination was superior to either agent alone in reducing new lesion activity, but the 3 year MRI result did not presage a clinical benefit over the extended observation interval. CONCLUSION: Combining GA & IFN did not produce a significant clinical benefit over the entire study duration. The earlier effect on reducing MRI activity did not result in a later clinical advantage. The combination showed a sustained advantage in reducing disease activity free status.