Evaluation of neurotrophic factor secreting mesenchymal stem cells in progressive multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Autologous mesenchymal stem cell neurotrophic factor-secreting cells (NurOwn®) have the potential to modify underlying disease mechanisms in progressive multiple sclerosis (PMS). OBJECTIVE: This open-label phase II study was conducted to evaluate safety/efficacy of three intrathecal cell treatments. METHODS: Eighteen participants with non-relapsing PMS were treated. The primary endpoint was safety. Secondary endpoints included: cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers; timed 25-foot walk speed, nine-hole peg test (9-HPT), low-contrast letter acuity, symbol digit modalities test, and 12-item multiple sclerosis (MS) walking scale. Seventeen participants received all treatments. RESULTS: No deaths/adverse events related to worsening of MS, clinical/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evidence of disease activation, and clinically significant changes in safety lab results were reported. Two participants developed symptoms of low back and leg pain, consistent with a diagnosis of arachnoiditis, occurring in one of three intrathecal treatments in both participants. Nineteen percent of treated participants achieved pre-specified ⩾ 25% improvements in timed 25-foot walk speed/nine-HPT at 28 weeks compared to baseline, along with consistent efficacy signals for pre-specified response criteria across other secondary efficacy outcomes. CSF neuroprotective factors increased, and inflammatory biomarkers decreased after treatment, consistent with the proposed mechanism of action. CONCLUSION: Based on these encouraging preliminary findings, further confirmation in a randomized study is warranted.

Myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG) antibody-mediated disease: The difficulty of predicting relapses.

BACKGROUND: While many patients with myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-mediated disease (MOG-AD) will have a monophasic course, 30-80% of patients will relapse after the initial attack. It is not known which factors predict relapse. Here we describe our clinical experience with MOG-AD and evaluate for factors that correlate with relapsing disease. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multi-institutional study of 54 patients with MOG-AD, including 17 children and 37 adults. Mann-Whitney U and Fischer's Exact tests were used for comparisons and logistic regression for correlations. RESULTS: Incident attack phenotype included acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (15%), unilateral optic neuritis (ON; 39%), bilateral ON (24%), transverse myelitis (TM; 11%) and ON with TM (11%). Pediatric patients were more likely than adults to present with ADEM (p = .009) and less likely to present with unilateral ON (p = .04). 31 patients (57%) had a relapsing disease course, with time to first relapse of 8.2 months and median annualized relapse rate of 0.97 months. In 40% of patients (n = 22) the first relapse occurred following the withdrawal of treatment for the incident attack. 5 patients converted to seronegative at follow up, 2 of whom later relapsed. Logistic regression revealed no significant relationship between age, gender, race, presentation phenotype, antibody titer, or cerebrospinal fluid results with risk of relapse. For patients who started disease modifying therapy (DMT) prior to the first relapse (n = 11), 64% remained monophasic. 50% (n = 15) of patients on DMT continued to have disease activity, requiring treatment adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: It is difficult to predict which patients with MOG-AD will relapse. Research is needed to determine the optimal timing and choice of treatment.

Ponesimod Compared With Teriflunomide in Patients With Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis in the Active-Comparator Phase 3 OPTIMUM Study: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: To our knowledge, the Oral Ponesimod Versus Teriflunomide In Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (OPTIMUM) trial is the first phase 3 study comparing 2 oral disease-modifying therapies for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). Objective: To compare the efficacy of ponesimod, a selective sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor 1 (S1P1) modulator with teriflunomide, a pyrimidine synthesis inhibitor, approved for the treatment of patients with RMS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, double-blind, active-comparator, superiority randomized clinical trial enrolled patients from April 27, 2015, to May 16, 2019, who were aged 18 to 55 years and had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis per 2010 McDonald criteria, with a relapsing course from the onset, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores of 0 to 5.5, and recent clinical or magnetic resonance imaging disease activity. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1) to 20 mg of ponesimod or 14 mg of teriflunomide once daily and the placebo for 108 weeks, with a 14-day gradual up-titration of ponesimod starting at 2 mg to mitigate first-dose cardiac effects of S1P1 modulators and a follow-up period of 30 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the annualized relapse rate. The secondary end points were the changes in symptom domain of Fatigue Symptom and Impact Questionnaire-Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (FSIQ-RMS) at week 108, the number of combined unique active lesions per year on magnetic resonance imaging, and time to 12-week and 24-week confirmed disability accumulation. Safety and tolerability were assessed. Exploratory end points included the percentage change in brain volume and no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3 and NEDA-4) status. Results: For 1133 patients (567 receiving ponesimod and 566 receiving teriflunomide; median [range], 37.0 [18-55] years; 735 women [64.9%]), the relative rate reduction for ponesimod vs teriflunomide in the annualized relapse rate was 30.5% (0.202 vs 0.290; P < .001); the mean difference in FSIQ-RMS, -3.57 (-0.01 vs 3.56; P < .001); the relative risk reduction in combined unique active lesions per year, 56% (1.405 vs 3.164; P < .001); and the reduction in time to 12-week and 24-week confirmed disability accumulation risk estimates, 17% (10.1% vs 12.4%; P = .29) and 16% (8.1% vs 9.9; P = .37), respectively. Brain volume loss at week 108 was lower by 0.34% (-0.91% vs -1.25%; P < .001); the odds ratio for NEDA-3 achievement was 1.70 (25.0% vs 16.4%; P < .001). Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (502 of 565 [88.8%] vs 499 of 566 [88.2%]) and serious treatment-emergent adverse events (49 [8.7%] vs 46 [8.1%]) was similar for both groups. Treatment discontinuations because of adverse events was more common in the ponesimod group (49 of 565 [8.7%] vs 34 of 566 [6.0%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, ponesimod was superior to teriflunomide on annualized relapse rate reduction, fatigue, magnetic resonance imaging activity, brain volume loss, and no evidence of disease activity status, but not confirmed disability accumulation. The safety profile was in line with the previous safety observations with ponesimod and the known profile of other S1P receptor modulators. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02425644.

Sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease With Unilateral Symptoms in the Setting of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Although it is not rare for magnetic resonance imaging findings in Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease to be asymmetric, unilateral clinical syndromes are uncommonly reported and may confound diagnosis. In addition, neurological paraneoplastic syndromes are not common in renal cell carcinoma, though there are cases reported, often without an offending antibody isolated. CASE REPORT: A 66-year-old man was admitted with 1 month of left-sided numbness and "loss of control" of the left arm. Examination revealed action-induced irregular jerking movements of the left arm. Mental status testing was normal. Magnetic resonance imaging brain revealed patchy areas of restricted diffusion along the cerebral cortices. Screening computed tomographic scans revealed innumerable lung nodules compatible with metastases, as well as a renal mass consistent with renal cell carcinoma. Lumbar puncture was performed and cerebrospinal fluid was sent for paraneoplastic autoantibody evaluation and protein 14-3-3. Over the next week the patient developed dystonic posturing of the left arm, left leg jerking movements, a right arm action tremor, and cognitive impairment. Paraneoplastic autoantibodies were negative. Protein 14-3-3 was elevated and brain biopsy revealed spongiform encephalopathy with positive immunoblotting. The patient died about 2 months from symptom onset. CONCLUSIONS: Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease can present with entirely unilateral myoclonus and numbness, without specific complaints of cognitive impairment. Not every difficult or unclear neurological syndrome in a patient with metastatic cancer is a paraneoplastic syndrome.

Ocrelizumab versus Interferon Beta-1a in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: B cells influence the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis. Ocrelizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively depletes CD20+ B cells. METHODS: In two identical phase 3 trials, we randomly assigned 821 and 835 patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis to receive intravenous ocrelizumab at a dose of 600 mg every 24 weeks or subcutaneous interferon beta-1a at a dose of 44 µg three times weekly for 96 weeks. The primary end point was the annualized relapse rate. RESULTS: The annualized relapse rate was lower with ocrelizumab than with interferon beta-1a in trial 1 (0.16 vs. 0.29; 46% lower rate with ocrelizumab; P<0.001) and in trial 2 (0.16 vs. 0.29; 47% lower rate; P<0.001). In prespecified pooled analyses, the percentage of patients with disability progression confirmed at 12 weeks was significantly lower with ocrelizumab than with interferon beta-1a (9.1% vs. 13.6%; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.81; P<0.001), as was the percentage of patients with disability progression confirmed at 24 weeks (6.9% vs. 10.5%; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.84; P=0.003). The mean number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions per T1-weighted magnetic resonance scan was 0.02 with ocrelizumab versus 0.29 with interferon beta-1a in trial 1 (94% lower number of lesions with ocrelizumab, P<0.001) and 0.02 versus 0.42 in trial 2 (95% lower number of lesions, P<0.001). The change in the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite score (a composite measure of walking speed, upper-limb movements, and cognition; for this z score, negative values indicate worsening and positive values indicate improvement) significantly favored ocrelizumab over interferon beta-1a in trial 2 (0.28 vs. 0.17, P=0.004) but not in trial 1 (0.21 vs. 0.17, P=0.33). Infusion-related reactions occurred in 34.3% of the patients treated with ocrelizumab. Serious infection occurred in 1.3% of the patients treated with ocrelizumab and in 2.9% of those treated with interferon beta-1a. Neoplasms occurred in 0.5% of the patients treated with ocrelizumab and in 0.2% of those treated with interferon beta-1a. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis, ocrelizumab was associated with lower rates of disease activity and progression than interferon beta-1a over a period of 96 weeks. Larger and longer studies of the safety of ocrelizumab are required. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; OPERA I and II ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01247324 and NCT01412333 , respectively.).

Ocrelizumab versus Placebo in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: An evolving understanding of the immunopathogenesis of multiple sclerosis suggests that depleting B cells could be useful for treatment. We studied ocrelizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively depletes CD20-expressing B cells, in the primary progressive form of the disease. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 732 patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis in a 2:1 ratio to receive intravenous ocrelizumab (600 mg) or placebo every 24 weeks for at least 120 weeks and until a prespecified number of confirmed disability progression events had occurred. The primary end point was the percentage of patients with disability progression confirmed at 12 weeks in a time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with 12-week confirmed disability progression was 32.9% with ocrelizumab versus 39.3% with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.98; P=0.03). The percentage of patients with 24-week confirmed disability progression was 29.6% with ocrelizumab versus 35.7% with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.98; P=0.04). By week 120, performance on the timed 25-foot walk worsened by 38.9% with ocrelizumab versus 55.1% with placebo (P=0.04); the total volume of brain lesions on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) decreased by 3.4% with ocrelizumab and increased by 7.4% with placebo (P<0.001); and the percentage of brain-volume loss was 0.90% with ocrelizumab versus 1.09% with placebo (P=0.02). There was no significant difference in the change in the Physical Component Summary score of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey. Infusion-related reactions, upper respiratory tract infections, and oral herpes infections were more frequent with ocrelizumab than with placebo. Neoplasms occurred in 2.3% of patients who received ocrelizumab and in 0.8% of patients who received placebo; there was no clinically significant difference between groups in the rates of serious adverse events and serious infections. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis, ocrelizumab was associated with lower rates of clinical and MRI progression than placebo. Extended observation is required to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of ocrelizumab. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; ORATORIO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01194570 .).

CME/CNE Article: A Framework of Care in Multiple Sclerosis, Part 1: Updated Disease Classification and Disease-Modifying Therapy Use in Specific Circumstances.

Activity Available Online: To access the article, post-test, and evaluation online, go to http://www.cmscscholar.org. TARGET AUDIENCE: The target audience for this activity is physicians, physician assistants, nursing professionals, and other health-care providers involved in the management of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). LEARNING OBJECTIVES: Apply new information about MS to a comprehensive individualized treatment plan for patients with MSIntegrate the team approach into long-term planning in order to optimize rehabilitation care of patients with MSAccreditation Statement: This activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the accreditation requirements and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint providership of the Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers (CMSC), Nurse Practitioner Alternatives (NPA), and Delaware Media Group. The CMSC is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The CMSC designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Nurse Practitioner Alternatives (NPA) is accredited as a provider of continuing nursing education by the American Nurses Credentialing Center's Commission on Accreditation. NPA designates this enduring material for 1.0 Continuing Nursing Education credit. Laurie Scudder, DNP, NP, has served as Nurse Planner for this activity. She has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Disclosures: Francois Bethoux, MD, Editor in Chief of the International Journal of MS Care (IJMSC), has served as Physician Planner for this activity. He has received royalties from Springer Publishing and has received intellectual property rights from Biogen. Laurie Scudder, DNP, NP, has served as Nurse Planner for this activity. She has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Scott D. Newsome, DO, MSCS (author), has served on scientific advisory boards for Biogen, Genentech, Novartis, and Genzyme, and has performed contracted research (institution received funds) for Biogen, Genentech, and Novartis. Philip J. Aliotta, MD, MSHA, CHCQM, FACS (author), has served on speakers' bureaus for Astellas Pharma, Actavis, Augmenix, and Allergan and has performed contracted research for Allergan. Jacquelyn Bainbridge, PharmD (author), has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Susan E. Bennett, PT, DPT, EdD, NCS, MSCS (author), has served on speakers' bureaus for Acorda Therapeutics, Biogen, and Medtronic; has received consulting fees from and performed contracted research for Acorda Therapeutics; and is chair of the Clinical Events Committee at Innovative Technologies. Gary Cutter, PhD (author), has participated on Data and Safety Monitoring Committees for AMO Pharma, Apotek, Gilead Pharmaceuticals, Horizon Pharmaceuticals, Modigenetech/Prolor, Merck, Merck/Pfizer, Opko Biologics, Neuren, Sanofi-Aventis, Reata Pharmaceuticals, Receptos/Celgene, Teva Pharmaceuticals, NHLBI (Protocol Review Committee), and NICHD (OPRU Oversight Committee); has received consulting fees from and/or served on speakers' bureaus and scientific advisory boards for Cerespir, Genzyme, Genentech, Innate Therapeutics, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Klein-Buendel Incorporated, MedImmune, Medday, Nivalis, Novartis, Opexa Therapeutics, Roche, Savara, Somahlution, Teva Pharmaceuticals, Transparency Life Sciences, and TG Therapeutics; and is President of Pythagoras, Inc., a private consulting company located in Birmingham, AL. Kaylan Fenton, CRNP, APNP, MSCN (author), has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Fred Lublin, MD (author), has received consulting fees/fees for non-CME/CE activities from Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, EMD Serono, Novartis, Teva Neuroscience, Actelion, Sanofi/Genzyme, Acorda, Questcor/Mallinckrodt, Roche/Genentech, MedImmune, Osmotica, Xenoport, Receptos/Celgene, Forward Pharma, Akros, TG Therapeutics, AbbVie, Toyama, Amgen, Medday, Atara Biotherapeutics, Polypharma, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Revalesio, Coronado Bioscience, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; has served on speakers' bureaus for Genentech/Roche and Genzyme/Sanofi; has performed contracted research for Acorda, Biogen, Novartis, Teva Neuroscience, Genzyme, Xenoport, and Receptos; is the co-chief editor of Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders; and has an ownership interest in Cognition Pharmaceuticals. Dorothy Northrop, MSW, ACSW (author), has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. David Rintell, EdD (author), has received consulting fees from Novartis and has served as a patient education speaker for Teva Neuroscience. He started as a salaried employee of Sanofi Genzyme in November 2015. Dr. Rintell's work on this project was completed before he became a salaried employee of Sanofi Genzyme.Bryan D. Walker, MHS, PA-C (author), has served on scientific advisory boards for EMD Serono and Sanofi Genzyme and owns stock in Biogen. Megan Weigel, DNP, ARNP-C, MSCN (author), has received consulting fees from Mallinckrodt, Genzyme, and Genentech, and has served on speakers' bureaus for Bayer Corp, Acorda Therapeutics, Teva Neuroscience, Biogen, Mallinckrodt, Genzyme, Novartis, and Pfizer. Kathleen Zackowski, PhD, OTR, MSCS (author), has performed contracted research for Acorda Therapeutics. David E. Jones, MD (author), has received consulting fees from Biogen and Novartis, and has performed contracted research for Biogen. One anonymous peer reviewer for the IJMSC has performed contracted research (institution received funds) for Novartis, Chugai, and Biogen. Another reviewer has received consulting fees and served on speakers' bureaus for Biogen, Sanofi Genzyme, Genentech, EMD Serono, and Novartis. The third reviewer has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Lori Saslow, MS (medical writer), has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. The staff at the IJMSC, CMSC, NPA, and Delaware Media Group who are in a position to influence content have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Note: Disclosures listed for authors are those applicable at the time of their work on this project and within 12 months previously. Financial relationships for some authors may have changed in the interval between the time of their work on this project and publication of the article. Funding/Support: Funding for the Framework of Care consensus conference was provided by the Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, and Mylan Pharmaceuticals. Method of Participation: Release Date: December 1, 2016 Valid for Credit Through: December 1, 2017 In order to receive CME/CNE credit, participants must: Review the CME/CNE information, including learning objectives and author disclosures.Study the educational content.Complete the post-test and evaluation, which are available at http://www.cmscscholar.org. Statements of Credit are awarded upon successful completion of the post-test with a passing score of >70% and the evaluation. There is no fee to participate in this activity. Disclosure of Unlabeled Use: This CME/CNE activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not approved by the FDA. CMSC, NPA, and Delaware Media Group do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications. The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of CMSC, NPA, or Delaware Media Group. Disclaimer: Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any medications, diagnostic procedures, or treatments discussed in this publication should not be used by clinicians or other health-care professionals without first evaluating their patients' conditions, considering possible contraindications or risks, reviewing any applicable manufacturer's product information, and comparing any therapeutic approach with the recommendations of other authorities.

Oral fingolimod in primary progressive multiple sclerosis (INFORMS): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: No treatments have been approved for primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Fingolimod, an oral sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulator, is effective in relapse-onset multiple sclerosis, but has not been assessed in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. We assessed the safety and efficacy of fingolimod in patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis. METHODS: In INFORMS, a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group study, patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis recruited across 148 centres in 18 countries were randomly allocated (1:1) with computer-generated blocks to receive oral fingolimod or placebo for at least 36 months and a maximum of 5 years. Patients were initially assigned to fingolimod 1·25 mg per day or placebo (cohort 1); however, after a protocol amendment on Nov 19, 2009, patients were switched in a masked manner to fingolimod 0·5 mg, whereas those on placebo continued on matching placebo. From then onwards, patients were assigned to receive fingolimod 0·5 mg/day or placebo (cohort 2). Key inclusion criteria were age 25-65 years, clinical diagnosis of primary progressive multiple sclerosis, 1 year or more of disease progression, and two of the following criteria: positive brain MRI; positive spinal cord MRI; or positive cerebrospinal fluid. Additional eligibility criteria included disease duration of 2-10 years and objective evidence of disability progression in the previous 2 years. Patients and study investigators were masked to group assignment. We used a novel primary composite endpoint based on change from baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), 25' Timed-Walk Test, or Nine-Hole Peg Test to assess time to 3-month confirmed disability progression in study participants treated for at least 3 years. All randomised patients took at least one dose of study drug. The primary efficacy analysis included all patients in cohort 2 and those assigned to placebo in cohort 1. The safety analysis included all patients in cohorts 1 and 2. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00731692. The study is now closed. FINDINGS: 970 patients were randomly assigned between Sept 3, 2008, and Aug 30, 2011 (147 to fingolimod 1·25 mg and 133 to placebo in cohort 1; 336 to fingolimod 0·5 mg and 354 to placebo in cohort 2). The efficacy analysis set (n=823) consisted of 336 patients randomly allocated to fingolimod 0·5 mg and 487 to placebo. Baseline characteristics were similar across groups and representative of a primary progressive multiple sclerosis population (48% women, mean age 48·5 years [SD 8·4], mean EDSS 4·67 [SD 1·03], 87% free of gadolinium-enhancing lesions). By end of study, 3-month confirmed disability progression had occurred in 232 and 338 patients in the fingolimod and placebo groups, respectively, resulting in Kaplan-Meier estimates of 77·2% (95% CI 71·87-82·51) of patients in the fingolimod group versus 80·3% (73·31-87·25) of patients in the placebo group (risk reduction 5·05%; hazard ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·80-1·12; p=0·544). Safety results were generally consistent with those of studies of fingolimod in patients with relapse-onset multiple sclerosis. Lymphopenia occurred in 19 (6%) patients in the fingolimod group versus none in the placebo group, bradycardia in five (1%) versus one (<1%), and first-degree atrioventricular block in three (1%) versus six (1%). Serious adverse events occurred in 84 (25%) patients in the fingolimod group and 117 (24%) in the placebo group, including macular oedema in six (2%) versus six (1%), and basal-cell carcinoma in 14 (4%) versus nine (2%). INTERPRETATION: The anti-inflammatory effects of fingolimod did not slow disease progression in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Therapeutic strategies for primary progressive multiple sclerosis might need different approaches to those used for relapse-onset multiple sclerosis. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma AG.

Primary Neurolymphomatosis Presenting With Polyradiculoneuropathy Affecting One Lower Limb.

OBJECTIVES: We report a case of primary neurolymphomatosis (NL) with unusual presentation and excellent treatment response. METHODS: Chart review. RESULTS: A 64-year-old woman presented with 2 months of progressive pain, weakness, and numbness in her right leg. Nerve conduction study/electromyogram suggested a right lumbosacral radiculoplexus neuropathy with associated acute right peroneal neuropathy at the fibular head. L/S spine and right leg magnetic resonance imaging showed thickening and contrast enhancement of the right S1 nerve root and the right distal sciatic, tibial, and common peroneal nerves, as well as a lobular enhancing lesion of the right superficial peroneal nerve. Whole-body fludeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scan showed no other lesions. A right superficial peroneal nerve lesion biopsy revealed infiltration of the nerve by diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. The lymphoma cells expressed BCL2 but not CD10, suggesting an origin in peripheral blood not lymph nodes. Despite the expression of BCL2, which is considered as a poor prognosis marker, our patient responded very well to the combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy with the R-MPV (rituximab, MTX, procarbazine, and vincristine) regimen. The patient showed marked clinical improvement and complete resolution of lymphoma lesions on the PET scan. CONCLUSIONS: Our case broadens the clinical spectrum and illustrates the importance of early diagnosis and aggressive treatment of primary NL.

Safety and efficacy of fingolimod in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (FREEDOMS II): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Fingolimod has shown reductions in clinical and MRI disease activity in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. We further assessed the efficacy and safety of fingolimod in such patients. METHODS: We did this placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 study predominantly in the USA (101 of 117 centres). Using a computer-generated sequence, we randomly allocated eligible patients-those aged 18-55 years with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis-to receive fingolimod 0·5 mg, fingolimod 1·25 mg, or placebo orally once daily (1:1:1; stratified by study centre). On Nov 12, 2009, all patients assigned to fingolimod 1·25 mg were switched to the 0·5 mg dose in a blinded manner after a review of data from other phase 3 trials and recommendation from the data and safety monitoring board, but were analysed as being in the 1·25 mg group in the primary outcome analysis. Our primary endpoint was annualised relapse rate at month 24, analysed by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints included percentage brain volume change (PBVC) from baseline and time-to-disability-progression confirmed at 3 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrilals.gov, number NCT00355134. FINDINGS: Between June 30, 2006, and March 4, 2009, we enrolled and randomly allocated 1083 patients: 370 to fingolimod 1·25 mg, 358 to fingolimod 0·5 mg, and 355 to placebo. Mean annualised relapse rate was 0·40 (95% CI 0·34-0·48) in patients given placebo and 0·21 (0·17-0·25) in patients given fingolimod 0·5 mg: rate ratio 0·52 (95% CI 0·40-0·66; p<0·0001), corresponding to a reduction of 48% with fingolimod 0·5 mg versus placebo. Mean PBVC was -0·86 (SD 1·22) for fingolimod 0·5 mg versus -1·28 (1·50) for placebo (treatment difference -0·41, 95% CI -0·62 to -0·20; p=0·0002). We recorded no statistically significant between-group difference in confirmed disability progression (hazard rate 0·83 with fingolimod 0·5 mg vs placebo; 95% CI 0·61-1·12; p=0·227). Fingolimod 0·5 mg caused more of the following adverse events versus placebo: lymphopenia (27 [8%] patients vs 0 patients), increased alanine aminotransferase (29 [8%] vs six [2%]), herpes zoster infection (nine [3%] vs three [1%]), hypertension (32 [9%] vs 11 [3%]), first-dose bradycardia (five [1%] vs one [<0·5%]), and first-degree atrioventricular block (17 [5%] vs seven [2%]). 53 (15%) of 358 patients given fingolimod 0·5 mg and 45 (13%) of 355 patients given placebo had serious adverse events over 24 months, which included basal-cell carcinoma (ten [3%] patients vs two [1%] patients), macular oedema (three [1%] vs two [1%]), infections (11 [3%] vs four [1%]), and neoplasms (13 [4%] vs eight [2%]). INTERPRETATION: Our findings expand knowledge of the safety profile of fingolimod and strengthen evidence for its beneficial effects on relapse rates in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. We saw no effect of fingolimod on disability progression. Our findings substantiate the beneficial profile of fingolimod as a disease-modifying agent in the management of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma AG.

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.

Future treatment approaches to multiple sclerosis.

The modern treatment era for multiple sclerosis (MS) began in 1993 with the approval of the first disease-modifying agent. Since then the field has greatly expanded, with 10 therapies currently approved to treat MS. These treatments are effective to reduce relapses and changes on MRI, and slow disability. However, despite these medications some patients continue to have exacerbations, accumulate disability, and develop progressive disease due to partial effectiveness. New molecules with novel mechanisms of action and targets are being explored. Hopefully these agents will yield even greater efficacy without significant safety concerns. As more aggressive therapies are available to treat MS, the goals and expectations of treatment are also likely to change. Some of the emerging therapies, including alemtuzumab, daclizumab, rituximab, ocrelizumab, laquinimod, estriol, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins), vitamin D, and stem cell transplantation, will be discussed in this chapter. In the future, therapies with different mechanisms may be combined, but this will need to be evaluated in clinical trials. Neuroprotection and repair definitely warrant further study. The future of MS treatment is very exciting, especially as our armamentarium expands.

Human placenta-derived cells (PDA-001) for the treatment of adults with multiple sclerosis: a randomized, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose study.

BACKGROUND: Infusion of PDA-001, a preparation of mesenchymal-like cells derived from full-term human placenta, is a new approach in the treatment of patients with multiple sclerosis. OBJECTIVE: This safety study aimed to rule out the possibility of paradoxical exacerbation of disease activity by PDA-001 in patients with multiple sclerosis. METHODS: This was a phase 1b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-dose ranging study including patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis or secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. The study was conducted at 6 sites in the United States and 2 sites in Canada. Patients were randomized 3:1 to receive 2 low-dose infusions of PDA-001 (150×10(6) cells) or placebo, given 1 week apart. After completing this cohort, subsequent patients received high-dose PDA-001 (600×10(6) cells) or placebo. Monthly brain magnetic resonance imaging scans were performed. The primary end point was ruling out the possibility of paradoxical worsening of MS disease activity. This was monitored using Cutter׳s rule (≥5 new gadolinium lesions on 2 consecutive scans) by brain magnetic resonance imaging on a monthly basis for six months and also the frequency of multiple sclerosis relapse. RESULTS: Ten patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and 6 with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis were randomly assigned to treatment: 6 to low-dose PDA-001, 6 to high-dose PDA-001, and 4 to placebo. No patient met Cutter׳s rule. One patient receiving high-dose PDA-001 had an increase in T2 and gadolinium lesions and in Expanded Disability Status Scale score during a multiple sclerosis flare 5 months after receiving PDA-001. No other patient had an increase in Expanded Disability Status Scale score>0.5, and most had stable or decreasing Expanded Disability Status Scale scores. With high-dose PDA-001, 1 patient experienced a grade 1 anaphylactoid reaction and 1 had grade 2 superficial thrombophlebitis. Other adverse events were mild to moderate and included headache, fatigue, infusion site reactions, and urinary tract infection. CONCLUSION: PDA-001 infusions were safe and well tolerated in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis patients. No paradoxical worsening of lesion counts was noted with either dose.

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.

Interferon beta and glatiramer acetate therapy.

Interferon beta and glatiramer acetate have been mainstays of treatment in relapsingremitting multiple sclerosis for two decades. Remarkable advances in our understanding of immune function and dysfunction as well as increasingly sophisticated clinical trial design have stemmed from efforts to better understand these drugs. In this chapter, we review the history of their development and elaborate on known and theorized mechanisms of action. We describe the pivotal clinical trials that have led to their widespread use. We evaluate the clinical use of the drugs including tolerability, side effects, and efficacy measures. Finally, we look to the future of interferon beta and glatiramer acetate in the context of an ever growing armamentarium of treatments for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis.

Impaired IFN-γ production and proliferation of NK cells in multiple sclerosis.

NK cells are multicompetent lymphocytes of the innate immune system with a central role in host defense and immune regulation. Studies in experimental animal models of multiple sclerosis (MS) provided evidence for both pathologic and protective effects of NK cells. Humans harbor two functionally distinct NK-cell subsets exerting either predominantly cytotoxic (CD56(dim)CD16(+)) or immunoregulatory (CD56(bright)CD16(-)) functions. We analyzed these two subsets and their functions in the peripheral blood of untreated patients with relapsing-remitting MS compared with healthy blood donors. While ex vivo frequencies of CD56(bright)CD16(-) and CD56(dim)CD16(+) NK cells were similar in patients and controls, we found that cytokine-driven in vitro accumulation and IFN-γ production of CD56(bright)CD16(-) NK cells but not of their CD56(dim)CD16(+) counterparts were substantially diminished in MS. Impaired expansion of CD56(bright)CD16(-) NK cells was cell intrinsic because the observed effects could be reproduced with purified NK cells in an independent cohort of patients and controls. In contrast, cytolytic NK-cell activity toward the human erythromyeloblastoid leukemia cell line K562, the allogeneic CD4(+) T cell line CEM and allogeneic primary CD4(+) T-cell blasts was unchanged. Thus, characteristic functions of CD56(bright)CD16(-) NK cells, namely cytokine-induced NK cell expansion and IFN-γ production, are compromised in the NK cell compartment of MS patients.

Neurotherapeutics in multiple sclerosis: novel agents and emerging treatment strategies.

New insights into the complex immunopathogenesis of multiple sclerosis have led to a proliferation of promising new therapeutic strategies. While the current armamentarium of immunomodulatory medications has demonstrated beneficial effects on the disease, more effective and tolerable therapies are needed. Several novel therapeutic strategies under investigation include oral therapies, monoclonal antibodies, symptomatic treatments, insights into neuroprotection and repair as well as combination regimens. New therapies may prove more efficacious and tolerable than the available arsenal of treatments; however, decisions regarding first-line therapies will expectedly become more complicated, with greater influence if risk-to-benefit ratios in light of premature safety data. Biomarker profiles may help elucidate disease subtypes as well as therapeutic response in an effort to individualize treatment choice. This review will highlight recent promising therapeutic strategies under investigation in the field of MS.

Natalizumab plus interferon beta-1a for relapsing multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Interferon beta is used to modify the course of relapsing multiple sclerosis. Despite interferon beta therapy, many patients have relapses. Natalizumab, an alpha4 integrin antagonist, appeared to be safe and effective alone and when added to interferon beta-1a in preliminary studies. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1171 patients who, despite interferon beta-1a therapy, had had at least one relapse during the 12-month period before randomization to receive continued interferon beta-1a in combination with 300 mg of natalizumab (589 patients) or placebo (582 patients) intravenously every 4 weeks for up to 116 weeks. The primary end points were the rate of clinical relapse at 1 year and the cumulative probability of disability progression sustained for 12 weeks, as measured by the Expanded Disability Status Scale, at 2 years. RESULTS: Combination therapy resulted in a 24 percent reduction in the relative risk of sustained disability progression (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.61 to 0.96; P=0.02). Kaplan-Meier estimates of the cumulative probability of progression at two years were 23 percent with combination therapy and 29 percent with interferon beta-1a alone. Combination therapy was associated with a lower annualized rate of relapse over a two-year period than was interferon beta-1a alone (0.34 vs. 0.75, P<0.001) and with fewer new or enlarging lesions on T(2)-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (0.9 vs. 5.4, P<0.001). Adverse events associated with combination therapy were anxiety, pharyngitis, sinus congestion, and peripheral edema. Two cases of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, one of which was fatal, were diagnosed in natalizumab-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Natalizumab added to interferon beta-1a was significantly more effective than interferon beta-1a alone in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Additional research is needed to elucidate the benefits and risks of this combination treatment. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00030966.).

History of modern multiple sclerosis therapy.

Although the earliest recorded description of multiple sclerosis (MS) dates back to the 14(th) century, it was not until the latter years of the 20(th) that treatments for this disabling condition were found. However, the "road to success" has not been without hurdles. Trials with both interferon alpha and gamma proved unsuccessful, as did treatment with oral myelin, cladribine, sulfasalazine and inhibitors of tumour necrosis factor. In 1993, interferon beta-1b (IFNbeta-1b) became the first therapy proven to be effective in altering the natural history of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). This was followed by successful trials with IFNbeta-1a and glatiramer acetate. In 1998, a European trial showed IFNbeta-1b to be also beneficial in the treatment of secondary progressive MS (SPMS). A similar trial in North America failed to reach its primary endpoint but was effective across secondary endpoints, highlighting how different methodology and patient populations can lead to inconsistent results and, thus, making comparisons across trials difficult. The trend for early intervention in MS with IFNbeta was recently supported by the CHAMPS (Controlled High-risk Avonex MultiPle Sclerosis) and ETOMS (Early Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis) studies using once-weekly IFNbeta-1a. Both trials demonstrated delayed conversion to clinically definite MS in patients with a clinically isolated syndrome and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings suggestive of MS. Two directly comparative trials of high- (250 microg IFNbeta-1b or 44 microg IFNbeta-1a) and low-dose (30 microg IFNbeta-1a) IFNbeta (INCOMIN [INdependent COMparison of INterferons] and EVIDENCE [EVidence of Interferon Dose-response: European North American Comparative Efficacy]) support the superior efficacy of the higher dose and/or more frequent administration for treating RRMS. Since MS entered the treatment era in 1993, therapies for RRMS, SPMS and, more recently, progressive- relapsing MS have been developed. There is now a much better understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease, but new and improved therapeutic approaches are still needed.

Combination therapy in multiple sclerosis.

Over the past decade, multiple sclerosis (MS) has become a treatable neurologic illness. However, given the rather modest benefit of the currently available disease-modifying agents, as well as the challenges associated with performing placebo-controlled, equivalence, and superiority trials, the logic of combining therapies in MS has considerable appeal. Selecting agents for combination requires careful consideration, as the immunomodulating activity of one drug could potentially interfere with the therapeutic effect of another, and certain combinations may be associated with unforeseen adverse effects. Rigorously controlled studies are needed to determine the safest and most effective use of new and existing MS therapies.