RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate immune responses to neoantigen and recall antigens in healthy subjects treated with teriflunomide. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Subjects received oral teriflunomide (70 mg once daily for 5 days followed by 14 mg once daily for 25 days) or placebo for 30 days. Antibody responses were evaluated following rabies vaccination (neoantigen) applied at days 5, 12, and 31 of the treatment period. Occurrence of delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) to Candida albicans, Trichophyton, and tuberculin (recall antigens) was assessed before and at the end of treatment to investigate cellular memory response. Safety and pharmacokinetics were evaluated. RESULTS: Forty-six randomized subjects were treated (teriflunomide, n = 23; placebo, n = 23) and completed the rabies vaccination. Geometric mean titers for rabies antibodies were lower with teriflunomide at days 31 and 38 than with placebo. However, all subjects achieved sufficient seroprotection following rabies vaccination (titers well above the 0.5 IU/mL threshold). Overall, the DTH response to recall antigens in the teriflunomide group did not notably differ from responses in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Following vaccination, geometric mean titers for rabies antibodies were lower with teriflunomide than with placebo. However, teriflunomide did not limit the ability to achieve seroprotective titers against this neoantigen. Evaluation of DTH showed that teriflunomide had no adverse impact on the cellular memory response to recall antigens. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that in normal subjects treated with teriflunomide, antibody titer responses to rabies vaccination are lower than with placebo but sufficient for seroprotection.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In previous studies, teriflunomide significantly reduced the annualised relapse rate (ARR) and disability progression. OBJECTIVE: This phase 3, rater-blinded study (NCT00883337) compared teriflunomide with interferon-beta-1a (IFNß-1a). METHODS: Patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis were randomised (1:1:1) to oral teriflunomide 7-or 14 mg, or subcutaneous IFNß-1a 44 µg. The primary composite endpoint was time to failure, defined as first occurrence of confirmed relapse or permanent treatment discontinuation for any cause. Secondary endpoints included ARR, Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS) and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM). The study was completed 48 weeks after the last patient was randomised. RESULTS: Some 324 patients were randomised (IFNß-1a: 104; teriflunomide 7 mg: 109; teriflunomide 14 mg: 111). No difference in time to failure was observed. There was no difference in ARR between teriflunomide 14 mg and IFNß-1a, but ARR was significantly higher with teriflunomide 7 mg. FIS scores indicated more frequent fatigue with IFNß-1a, though differences were only significant with teriflunomide 7 mg. TSQM scores were significantly higher with teriflunomide. There were no unexpected safety findings. CONCLUSION: Effects on time to failure were comparable between teriflunomide and IFNß-1a. There was no difference between teriflunomide 14 mg and IFNß-1a on ARR, though ARR was higher with teriflunomide 7 mg. The teriflunomide safety profile was consistent with previous studies.
