Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Different therapeutic strategies are available for the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), including immunomodulators, immunosuppressants and biological agents. Although each one of these therapies reduces relapse frequency and slows disability accumulation compared to no treatment, their relative benefit remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review published in 2015. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety, through network meta-analysis, of interferon beta-1b, interferon beta-1a, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab, pegylated interferon beta-1a, daclizumab, laquinimod, azathioprine, immunoglobulins, cladribine, cyclophosphamide, diroximel fumarate, fludarabine, interferon beta 1-a and beta 1-b, leflunomide, methotrexate, minocycline, mycophenolate mofetil, ofatumumab, ozanimod, ponesimod, rituximab, siponimod and steroids for the treatment of people with RRMS. SEARCH METHODS: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers were searched on 21 September 2021 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. A top-up search was conducted on 8 August 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that studied one or more of the available immunomodulators and immunosuppressants as monotherapy in comparison to placebo or to another active agent, in adults with RRMS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We considered both direct and indirect evidence and performed data synthesis by pairwise and network meta-analysis. Certainty of the evidence was assessed by the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 50 studies involving 36,541 participants (68.6% female and 31.4% male). Median treatment duration was 24 months, and 25 (50%) studies were placebo-controlled. Considering the risk of bias, the most frequent concern was related to the role of the sponsor in the authorship of the study report or in data management and analysis, for which we judged 68% of the studies were at high risk of other bias. The other frequent concerns were performance bias (34% judged as having high risk) and attrition bias (32% judged as having high risk). Placebo was used as the common comparator for network analysis. Relapses over 12 months: data were provided in 18 studies (9310 participants). Natalizumab results in a large reduction of people with relapses at 12 months (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.63; high-certainty evidence). Fingolimod (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.57; moderate-certainty evidence), daclizumab (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73; moderate-certainty evidence), and immunoglobulins (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.79; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a large reduction of people with relapses at 12 months. Relapses over 24 months: data were reported in 28 studies (19,869 participants). Cladribine (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.64; high-certainty evidence), alemtuzumab (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.68; high-certainty evidence) and natalizumab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.65; high-certainty evidence) result in a large decrease of people with relapses at 24 months. Fingolimod (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.60; moderate-certainty evidence), dimethyl fumarate (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.70; moderate-certainty evidence), and ponesimod (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.70; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a large decrease of people with relapses at 24 months. Glatiramer acetate (RR 0.84, 95%, CI 0.76 to 0.93; moderate-certainty evidence) and interferon beta-1a (Avonex, Rebif) (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.91; moderate-certainty evidence) probably moderately decrease people with relapses at 24 months. Relapses over 36 months findings were available from five studies (3087 participants). None of the treatments assessed showed moderate- or high-certainty evidence compared to placebo. Disability worsening over 24 months was assessed in 31 studies (24,303 participants). Natalizumab probably results in a large reduction of disability worsening (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.75; moderate-certainty evidence) at 24 months. Disability worsening over 36 months was assessed in three studies (2684 participants) but none of the studies used placebo as the comparator. Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events data were available from 43 studies (35,410 participants). Alemtuzumab probably results in a slight reduction of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.79; moderate-certainty evidence). Daclizumab (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.40 to 4.63; moderate-certainty evidence), fingolimod (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.57; moderate-certainty evidence), teriflunomide (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.79; moderate-certainty evidence), interferon beta-1a (OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.20; moderate-certainty evidence), laquinimod (OR 1.49, 95 % CI 1.00 to 2.15; moderate-certainty evidence), natalizumab (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.05), and glatiramer acetate (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.14; moderate-certainty evidence) probably result in a slight increase in the number of people who discontinue treatment due to adverse events. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in 35 studies (33,998 participants). There was probably a trivial reduction in SAEs amongst people with RRMS treated with interferon beta-1b as compared to placebo (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.54; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are highly confident that, compared to placebo, two-year treatment with natalizumab, cladribine, or alemtuzumab decreases relapses more than with other DMTs. We are moderately confident that a two-year treatment with natalizumab may slow disability progression. Compared to those on placebo, people with RRMS treated with most of the assessed DMTs showed a higher frequency of treatment discontinuation due to AEs: we are moderately confident that this could happen with fingolimod, teriflunomide, interferon beta-1a, laquinimod, natalizumab and daclizumab, while our certainty with other DMTs is lower. We are also moderately certain that treatment with alemtuzumab is associated with fewer discontinuations due to adverse events than placebo, and moderately certain that interferon beta-1b probably results in a slight reduction in people who experience serious adverse events, but our certainty with regard to other DMTs is lower. Insufficient evidence is available to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DMTs in a longer term than two years, and this is a relevant issue for a chronic condition like MS that develops over decades. More than half of the included studies were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and this may have influenced their results. Further studies should focus on direct comparison between active agents, with follow-up of at least three years, and assess other patient-relevant outcomes, such as quality of life and cognitive status, with particular focus on the impact of sex/gender on treatment effects.

Type I interferon autoantibodies in hospitalized patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome and association with outcomes and treatment effect of interferon beta-1b in MIRACLE clinical trial.

Background: Type I interferons (IFNs) are essential antiviral cytokines induced upon respiratory exposure to coronaviruses. Defects in type I IFN signaling can result in severe disease upon exposure to respiratory viral infection and are associated with worse clinical outcomes. Neutralizing autoantibodies (auto-Abs) to type I IFNs were reported as a risk factor for life-threatening COVID-19, but their presence has not been evaluated in patients with severe Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). Methods: We evaluated the prevalence of type I IFN auto-Abs in a cohort of hospitalized patients with MERS who were enrolled in a placebo-controlled clinical trial for treatment with IFN-ß1b and lopinavir-ritonavir (MIRACLE trial). Samples were tested for type I IFN auto-Abs using a multiplex particle-based assay. Results: Among the 62 enrolled patients, 15 (24.2%) were positive for immunoglobulin G auto-Abs for at least one subtype of type I IFNs. Auto-Abs positive patients were not different from auto-Abs negative patients in age, sex, or comorbidities. However, the majority (93.3%) of patients who were auto-Abs positive were critically ill and admitted to the ICU at the time of enrollment compared to 66% in the auto-Abs negative patients. The effect of treatment with IFN-ß1b and lopinavir-ritonavir did not significantly differ between the two groups. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the presence of type I IFN auto-Abs in hospitalized patients with MERS.

Early Treatment of High-Risk Hospitalized Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Patients With a Combination of Interferon Beta-1b and Remdesivir: A Phase 2 Open-label Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Early antiviral therapy was effective in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We assessed the efficacy and safety of combined interferon beta-1b and remdesivir treatment in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, prospective open-label, randomized-controlled trial involving high-risk adults hospitalized for COVID-19. Patients were randomly assigned to a 5-day interferon beta-1b 16 million units daily and remdesivir 200 mg loading on day 1 followed by 100 mg daily on day 2 to 5 (combination group), or to remdesivir only of similar regimen (control group) (1:1). The primary endpoint was the time to complete alleviation of symptoms (NEWS2 = 0). RESULTS: Two-hundred and twelve patients were enrolled. The median days of starting treatment from symptom onset was 3 days. The median age was 65 years, and 159 patients (75%) had chronic disease. The baseline demographics were similar. There was no mortality. For the primary endpoint, the combination group was significantly quicker to NEWS2 = 0 (4 vs 6.5 days; hazard ratio [HR], 6.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.1-7.09; P < .0001) when compared to the control group. For the secondary endpoints, the combination group was quicker to negative nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) viral load (VL) (6 vs 8 days; HR, 8.16; 95% CI, 7.79-8.52; P < .0001) and to develop seropositive immunoglobulin G (IgG) (8 vs 10 days; HR, 10.78; 95% CI, 9.98-11.58; P < .0001). All adverse events resolved upon follow-up. Combination group (HR, 4.1 95% CI, 1.9-8.6, P < .0001) was the most significant independent factor associated with NEWS2 = 0 on day 4. CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment with interferon beta-1b and remdesivir was safe and better than remdesivir only in alleviating symptoms, and in shortening viral shedding and hospitalization with earlier seropositivity in high-risk COVID-19 patients. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04647695.

Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for severe COVID-19 patients: An updated network meta-analysis of 48 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: To date, there has been little agreement on what drug is the "best" drug for treating severe COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of different medications available at present for severe COVID-19. METHODS: We searched databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to February 28, 2022, with no language restrictions, of medications recommended for patients (aged 16 years or older) with severe COVID-19 infection. We extracted data on trials and patient characteristics, and the following primary outcomes: all-cause mortality (ACM), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: We identified 4021 abstracts and of these included 48 RCTs comprising 9147 participants through database searches and other sources. For decrease in ACM, we found that ivermectin/doxycycline, C-IVIG (i.e., a hyperimmune anti-COVID-19 intravenous immunoglobulin), methylprednisolone, interferon-beta/standard-of-care (SOC), interferon-beta-1b, convalescent plasma, remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, immunoglobulin gamma, high dosage sarilumab (HS), auxora, and imatinib were effective when compared with placebo or SOC group. We found that colchicine and interferon-beta/SOC were only associated with the TEAEs of severe COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSION: This study suggested that ivermectin/doxycycline, C-IVIG, methylprednisolone, interferon-beta/SOC, interferon-beta-1b, convalescent plasma (CP), remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, immunoglobulin gamma, HS, auxora, and imatinib were efficacious for treating severe COVID-19 patients. We found that most medications were safe in treating severe COVID-19. More large-scale RCTs are still needed to confirm the results of this study.

[Long-term treatment for multiple sclerosis with interferon beta-1b. Outcomes of an open, retrospective, observational study]. / Dolgosrochnaya terapiya rasseyannogo skleroza interferonom beta-1b. Rezul'taty retrospektivnogo otkrytogo nablyudatel'nogo issledovaniya.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcomes of long-term treatment in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients with Infibeta (interferon beta-1b). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The article presents the results a real-world, multicenter, retrospective, observational study of treatment with interferon beta-1b. We enrolled 332 patients with MS who had been receiving Infibeta for at least 8 years. 60.2% of them had a relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). 73.2% patients received only interferon beta-1b that was initial DMT. RESULTS: During the first year of the treatment, 66% of the patients reported no relapses regardless of the MS type. No relapses in the 8th year of treatment were observed in 86.9% of patients with RRMS and 77.7% with secondary progressive MS (SPMS). The median number of relapses during the whole follow-up period in RRMS patients was 1. The time to first relapse in the subgroup of patients who received interferon beta as the first treatment was longer compared to other treatment (median 4 and 2, respectively, p=0.0017). 42% of patients with RRMS remained progression-free during 8 years of follow-up. The flu-like syndrome was observed in 61.7% for the first year of treatment; in 36.3% it was periodically and was mild in 71.3%. CONCLUSION: The study outcomes confirm a high clinical response to the long-term treatment with Infibeta in patients with RRMS and SPMS and demonstrate that interferon beta-1b is one an optimal option for the initial treatment of patients with moderate disease activity.

Comparative Efficacy of Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis Therapies: Model-Based Meta-Analyses for Confirmed Disability Accumulation and Annualized Relapse Rate.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory autoimmune disorder and the most common cause of non-traumatic disability in young adults. The Phase 3 OPTIMUM study evaluated the efficacy and safety of oral ponesimod, a selective sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) receptor 1 modulator, vs. teriflunomide in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). The aim of this analysis was to assess the effect of ponesimod and other disease modifying treatments (DMTs) compared to placebo, as measured by 12-week confirmed disability accumulation (CDA) and annualized relapse rate (ARR) in RMS patients. METHODS: A database was developed by Certara Inc. (USA) based on relevant clinical trials identified from searching the following sources: PubMed, clinicaltrials.gov, FDA and EMEA documents, and conference abstracts. This database consisted of 203 unique randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 74 MS treatments and was subsequently filtered to include RCTs with more than 25 patients receiving monotherapy to treat RMS for at least 48 weeks. A model-based meta-analysis (MBMA) was performed on the filtered database to assess treatment effects measured by CDA and ARR. Analyzed data for CDA were digitized from published Kaplan-Meier plots. A Weibull distribution was assumed to adequately capture the relationship of CDA probability over time, and hazard ratios (HRs) between treatments were assumed constant over time (proportional hazards). HRs were estimated for 12-week CDA for 17 DMTs vs. placebo. Additionally, mean ARR for each treatment arm was modelled, where relative effect versus placebo was estimated as a fixed effect parameter for each unique drug. A dose-response relationship was included if data for multiple doses were available. Relative treatment effect covariates explored for CDA and ARR included: percent of patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), trial start year, mean duration of disease, percent of patients who received DMTs within the prior 2 years (pDMT), mean number of relapses in the prior year, mean age, mean baseline EDSS score, and mean treatment duration (for ARR). RESULTS: The 12-week CDA model utilized longitudinal data from 26 RCTs (18 unique treatments [including placebo]), 69 treatment arms, 31,160 patients). The ARR model utilized data from 40 RCTs (18 unique treatments [including placebo], 100 treatment arms, 33,686 patients). Compared to placebo, ponesimod significantly reduced 12-week CDA by 39% (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.45-0.82) and reduced ARR by 53% (rate ratio [RR]: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.39-0.58). Except for three DMTs (interferon ß-1b, glatiramer acetate, ozanimod), HR of 12-week CDA vs. placebo was significantly lower for the DMTs included in this analysis (HR range: 0.41 to 0.79). The ARR was significantly reduced for all DMTs compared to placebo (RR range: 0.29 to 0.82). A dose-response relationship indicated a potential dose-dependent effect (12-week CDA: 6 treatments; ARR: 8 treatments). Relative treatment effect was found to be significantly smaller in trials including more patients with prior DMT usage. Cross-trial heterogeneity in relative effects was assessed and found to be negligible; however, there is a possibility that confounders remain which may impact estimated relative treatment effects. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to placebo, ponesimod 20 mg significantly reduced both the risk of 12-week CDA and mean ARR, suggesting it has robust efficacy in the treatment of RMS. The study was funded by Janssen Research & Development, LLC.

Beneficial Effect of Melatonin Alone or in Combination with Glatiramer Acetate and Interferon ß-1b on Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis.

Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) is a relevant animal model of multiple sclerosis (MS). Oxidative stress and chronic inflammation play a major role in the pathogenesis of MS and EAE. Melatonin, a neurohormone, has potent anti-inflammatory properties. The aim of our study was to assess the therapeutic properties of melatonin alone or in combination with interferon ß-1b (IFNß-1b) or glatiramer acetate (GA) on EAE. EAE was induced in male Sprague-Dawley rats with an intraperitoneal injection of a homogenate of spinal cord and pig brain. At day 10 post immunization, rats were euthanized, and their brains were immediately excised and processed to measure oxidative stress markers and membrane fluidity. In addition, proinflammatory cytokines were quantified in plasma. Melatonin alone or in combination with GA and IFNß-1b inhibited the disease process of EAE and the synthesis of proinflammatory cytokines, caused a significant decrement in oxidative stress markers, and preserved the membrane fluidity in the motor cortex, midbrain, and spinal cord. The cumulative index score was significantly reduced in EAE rats treated with melatonin alone or in combination with GA and IFNß-1b. In conclusion, our findings provide preclinical evidence for the use of melatonin as an adjuvant therapeutic treatment for MS.

Stopping Interferon Beta 1b Does Not Influence the Risk of Disability Accrual in Non-Active SPMS: Results from an Italian Real-World Study.

BACKGROUND: No consensus exists on the possibility to stop disease modifying therapies (DMTs) in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis (SPMS). METHODS: The primary outcome was the time to reach 24-weeks confirmed Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) 7.0. We enrolled all patients with a confirmed diagnosis of non-active SPMS (here, absence of clinical or radiological activity for at least 24 months before the conversion) between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2015, at MS centers of Catania and Foggia, Italy. Patients were divided into two groups, according to the shared decision to stop DMTs (group A) or to maintain/switch to licensed interferon beta 1b for SPMS (group B). A Cox model adjusted with an inverse probability weighted propensity score (IPTW-PS) was employed. RESULTS: A cohort of 311 patients was enrolled, 165 were in group A and 146 were in group B. Patients in the two groups were similar for baseline characteristics. The IPTW-PS adjusted Cox model for the event time to 24-weeks confirmed EDSS 7.0 did not show differences between the two groups (ExpB 0.96, CI 0.739-1.271, p = 0.819). CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, in patients with non-active SPMS, the maintaining or switching to the licensed interferon beta 1b did not reduce the risk of reaching confirmed EDSS 7.0.

A guide to immunotherapy for COVID-19.

Immune dysregulation is an important component of the pathophysiology of COVID-19. A large body of literature has reported the effect of immune-based therapies in patients with COVID-19, with some remarkable successes such as the use of steroids or anti-cytokine therapies. However, challenges in clinical decision-making arise from the complexity of the disease phenotypes and patient heterogeneity, as well as the variable quality of evidence from immunotherapy studies. This Review aims to support clinical decision-making by providing an overview of the evidence generated by major clinical trials of host-directed therapy. We discuss patient stratification and propose an algorithm to guide the use of immunotherapy strategies in the clinic. This will not only help guide treatment decisions, but may also help to design future trials that investigate immunotherapy in other severe infections.

Trends in administrative prevalence of multiple sclerosis and utilization patterns of disease modifying drugs in Germany.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to describe recent developments of multiple sclerosis (MS) prevalence in Germany and to assess utilization patterns of disease-modifying drugs (DMDs). METHODS: We used nationwide outpatient claims data of the statutory health insurance (SHI) from the years 2012 to 2019, covering 87% of the total German population. In annual cross-sectional analyses, MS prevalence was measured as the percentage of the SHI population affected by MS. Annual agent-specific prescription prevalence of DMDs was calculated by the number of patients receiving the DMD per 1.000 MS patients. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2019, the prevalence of MS increased gradually from 0.27% to 0.34%. The overall DMD prescription prevalence in MS patients rose from 436 per 1,000 MS patients (2012) to 483 (2019). From 2012 to 2019 the prescription prevalence of interferon-beta 1a and interferon-beta 1b decreased sharply from 180.2 to 70.8 (-61%) and 80.2 to 34.1 (-57%), respectively. In contrast, the prescription prevalence of teriflunomide (2012: 8.5; 2019: 54.5) and fingolimod (2012: 28.5; 2019: 63.8) exhibited a pronounced increase by factors of 5.4 and 2.2, respectively. CONCLUSION: MS prevalence in Germany steadily increased in recent years. MS treatment patterns changed markedly indicating a shifting predominance of DMD injectable drugs to oral medications.

A controlled, randomized phase II clinical trial for efficacy and safety evaluation of mannuronic acid in secondary progressive form of multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: The ß-D-Mannuronic acid (M2000) as a novel immunosuppressive drug, patented (PCT/EP2017/067920), has shown positive effects in experimental model of multiple sclerosis (MS). In this study, our aim was to assess efficacy and safety outcomes in MS treated patients with mannuronic acid compared to the conventional drug. METHODS: In a 6-month, randomized controlled, phase II trial, we enrolled patients who had secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS), were 21-54 years of age, with a score of 1-7 on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), and who had at least one relapse in the previous 6 months. Patients were administered orally 1000 mg/day (two 500 mg/capsule daily) of M2000. Endpoints included changes in brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measures and the EDSS score, as compared to the conventional drug (interferon beta-1a, interferon beta-1b). RESULTS: A total of 25 (92.5%) of the M2000 treated patients and 25 conventionally treated patients completed the study. M2000 had better performance compared to the conventional drug regarding to MRI-related measurements, however, the differences between groups were not statistically significant. M2000 decreased the disability progression over the 6-month period. The EDSS score was decreased in the M2000 treated group in the sixth month versus the conventional drug (p < 0.009). Furthermore, we did not observe any short-term side effects. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with the conventional drug, mannuronic acid (M2000) improved the rate of disability progression. This clinical trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of mannuronic acid in patients with SPMS. (Registered Clinical Trials number, IRCT2016111313739N6).

The Impact of Interferon Beta-1b Therapy on Thyroid Function and Autoimmunity Among COVID-19 Survivors.

Background: Some studies have indicated that interferon (IFN) may be valuable in COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate the impact of short-term IFN on incident thyroid dysfunction and autoimmunity among COVID-19 survivors. Methods: We included consecutive adults without known thyroid disorder admitted to Queen Mary Hospital for COVID-19 from July 2020 to January 2021 who had thyroid function tests (TFTs) and anti-thyroid antibodies measured both on admission and at three months. Results: 226 patients were included (median age 55.0 years; 49.6% men): 135 were IFN-treated. There tended to be more abnormal TFTs upon reassessment in IFN-treated patients (8.1% vs 2.2%, p=0.080). 179 patients (65.4% IFN-treated) had a complete reassessment of anti-thyroid antibodies. There were significant increases in titres of both anti-thyroid peroxidase antibodies (anti-TPO: baseline 29.21 units [IQR: 14.97 - 67.14] vs reassessment 34.30 units [IQR: 18.82 - 94.65], p<0.001) and anti-thyroglobulin antibodies (anti-Tg: baseline 8.23 units [IQR: 5.40 - 18.44] vs reassessment 9.14 units [IQR: 6.83 - 17.17], p=0.001) in the IFN-treated group but not IFN-naïve group. IFN treatment (standardised beta 0.245, p=0.001) was independently associated with changes in anti-TPO titre. Of the 143 patients negative for anti-TPO at baseline, 8 became anti-TPO positive upon reassessment (seven IFN-treated; one IFN-naïve). Incident anti-TPO positivity was more likely to be associated with abnormal TFTs upon reassessment (phi 0.188, p=0.025). Conclusion: IFN for COVID-19 was associated with modest increases in anti-thyroid antibody titres, and a trend of more incident anti-TPO positivity and abnormal TFTs during convalescence. Our findings suggest that clinicians monitor the thyroid function and anti-thyroid antibodies among IFN-treated COVID-19 survivors, and call for further follow-up studies regarding the clinical significance of these changes.

Comparing the outcomes of treatment with INF-ß 1-a (interferon beta-1a) and IFN-ß 1-b (interferon beta-1b) among COVID-19 inpatients.

BACKGROUND: IFNßs are known as one of the most promising drugs used for COVID-19 treatment. This study aimed to investigate the effects of treatment with INF-ß 1-a (interferon beta-1a) and IFN-ß 1-b (interferon beta-1b) on COVID-19 inpatients. METHODS: In this study, we retrospectively evaluated the clinical treatment outcomes of 100 patients with COVID-19 who received IFN-ß 1-a and IFN-ß 1-b during their hospitalization period. The rate of discharge from the hospital was considered equal to the clinical improvement and then evaluated as a primary outcome. Moreover, mortality, ICU admission and length of ICU stay, frequency of intubation and use of mechanical ventilation, duration of hospitalization, laboratory factors, and medications were assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The median discharge time of IFN-ß 1a recipients was approximately equal to that of IFN-ß 1-b recipients as 9 (5-10) days and 7 (5-11) days, respectively (HR = 2.43, P = 0.75). Mortality rate was also estimated as 10% among IFN-ß 1-a recipients and 14% among IFN-ß 1-b recipients, which was not statistically significant (p = 0.190). ICU hospitalization rate for the IFN-ß 1-a recipients and IFN-ß 1-b recipients was 26% and 36%, respectively. In addition, no significant difference was found between these two intervention groups in terms of ICU length of stay (1 (0-2) vs. 1 (0-4.25(, respectively,) P = 0.357). There was no significant difference between the two study groups in terms of frequency of mechanical ventilation and length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of shortening the disease time, clinical improvements and other outcomes.

The influence of interferon ß-1b on gut microbiota composition in patients with multiple sclerosis.

INTRODUCTION: The association between gut microbiota and animal models of multiple sclerosis has been well established; however, studies in humans are scarce. METHODS: We performed a descriptive, cross-sectional study comparing the relative composition of gut microbiota in 30 patients with multiple sclerosis (15 treated with interferon ß-1b, 15 not receiving this treatment) and 14 healthy controls using next generation sequencing. RESULTS: Patients with multiple sclerosis and controls showed differences in the proportion of Euryarchaeota, Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, and Lentisphaerae phyla and in 17 bacterial species. More specifically, we found significant differences in the proportion of Firmicutes, Actinobacteria, and Lentisphaerae and 6 bacteria species between controls and untreated patients; however, these differences disappeared when compared with treated patients. Untreated patients showed a significant reduction in the proportion of Prevotella copri compared to controls, while the bacteria was significantly more abundant in patients treated with interferon ß-1b than in untreated patients, with levels resembling those observed in the healthy control group. CONCLUSION: We observed differences in gut microbiota composition between patients with multiple sclerosis and controls, and between patients treated and not treated with interferon ß-1b. In most cases, no differences were observed between treated patients and healthy controls, particularly for P. copri levels. This suggests that the clinical improvements observed in patients with multiple sclerosis receiving interferon ß-1b may result from the effect of the drug on gut microbiota. Longitudinal and functional studies are necessary to establish a causal relationship.

Composición de la microbiota intestinal en pacientes con esclerosis múltiple. Influencia del tratamiento con interferón B-1b / The influence of interferon B–1b on gut microbiota composition in patients with multiple sclerosis

Introducción. El papel de la microbiota en los modelos animales de esclerosis múltiple está bien establecido; por el contrario, los estudios en humanos son escasos.MétodosEstudio transversal descriptivo que compara la composición relativa de la microbiota intestinal en 30 pacientes con esclerosis múltiple (15 tratados con interferón β-1b, 15 sin tratamiento) y 14 controles sanos utilizando la secuenciación de última generación.ResultadosLos sujetos control y los pacientes con esclerosis múltiple presentaron diferente abundancia de los filos Euryarchaeota, Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, y Lentisphaerae y 17 especies bacterianas. Concretamente, la abundancia en Firmicutes, Actinobacteria y Lentisphaerae y 6 especies mostró diferencias al comparar los grupos control y sin tratamiento, desapareciendo esta diferencia cuando se compararon con los pacientes tratados. Se observó reducción estadísticamente significativa en la abundancia de Prevotella copri en pacientes sin tratamiento en comparación con controles, mientras que los tratados con interferón β-1b presentaron un aumento significativo frente a pacientes sin tratamiento, asemejándose al grupo de pacientes sanos control.ConclusiónLa composición de la microbiota intestinal fue diferente entre los pacientes con esclerosis múltiple y los controles, y entre los pacientes sin tratamiento y los tratados con interferón β-1b. En la mayoría de los casos, no se encontraron diferencias entre los pacientes tratados y los controles sanos, siendo especialmente evidente con P. copri. Esto podría indicar que la influencia del interferón β-1b sobre la microbiota intestinal podría subyacer en los beneficios clínicos observados en pacientes con esclerosis múltiple que siguen este tratamiento. Serán necesarios estudios longitudinales y funcionales para poder mostrar causalidad. (AU)

Introduction: The association between gut microbiota and animal models of multiple sclerosis has been well established; however, studies in humans are scarce.MethodsWe performed a descriptive, cross-sectional study comparing the relative composition of gut microbiota in 30 patients with multiple sclerosis (15 treated with interferon β–1b, 15 not receiving this treatment) and 14 healthy controls using next generation sequencing.ResultsPatients with multiple sclerosis and controls showed differences in the proportion of Euryarchaeota, Firmicutes, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, and Lentisphaerae phyla and in 17 bacterial species. More specifically, we found significant differences in the proportion of Firmicutes, Actinobacteria, and Lentisphaerae and 6 bacteria species between controls and untreated patients; however, these differences disappeared when compared with treated patients. Untreated patients showed a significant reduction in the proportion of Prevotella copri compared to controls, while the bacteria was significantly more abundant in patients treated with interferon β–1b than in untreated patients, with levels resembling those observed in the healthy control group.ConclusionWe observed differences in gut microbiota composition between patients with multiple sclerosis and controls, and between patients treated and not treated with interferon β–1b. In most cases, no differences were observed between treated patients and healthy controls, particularly for P. copri levels. This suggests that the clinical improvements observed in patients with multiple sclerosis receiving interferon β–1b may result from the effect of the drug on gut microbiota. Longitudinal and functional studies are necessary to establish a causal relationship. (AU)

Clinical characteristics of middle-aged and older patients with MS treated with interferon beta-1b: post-hoc analysis of a 2-year, prospective, international, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Despite trends towards the increased age of patients living with multiple sclerosis (MS), little is known about the response of older adults with MS to disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). Thus, a post-hoc analysis was undertaken using data from a 2-year, international, non-interventional, prospective cohort study (NCT00787657; BEACON: BEtaferon prospective study on Adherence, COping and Nurse support) of patients above the age of 40 years with MS and starting interferon beta-1b (IFNB-1b) treatment within 6 months before study entry. METHODS: Middle-aged and older patients with MS were divided into two sub-groups: 41-50 years and > 50 years. Treatment with IFNB-1b started within 6 months before study entry. Patients were followed-up for a 2-year observation period. Assessments included disease history and course, annualised relapse rate (ARR), Expanded Disability Scale Score (EDSS), treatment adherence, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and adverse events (AE). RESULTS: At baseline, the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (n = 481) aged 41-50 years (n = 327) and > 50 years (n = 154), had mean (standard deviation [SD]) ages of 45.1 (2.8) and 56.2 (4.2) years, maximum age of 72 years, and duration of MS since onset of symptoms of 3.9 (5.2) and 5.9 (7.1) years, respectively. At baseline, the proportion of patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) was 96.3 and 94.9 %, and secondary progressive MS (SPMS) was 3.7 and 5.1 %, in the 41-50 and > 50 years sub-groups, respectively. The ARR in the 2 years before study start was 0.93 (0.48) and 0.86 (0.54) for the 41-50 and > 50 years groups, respectively, and decreased since study start to 0.20 (1.09) and 0.07 (0.37), respectively. The percentage of patients with anxiety and depression, as measured by HADS, were stable over the study period. Polypharmacy (five or more medications) was seen in 32.3 and 41.2 % of patients aged 41-50 and > 50 years. No unexpected AEs were reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides observational data on patients between 40 and 72 years of age, suggesting that IFNB-1b can be an effective and well-tolerated treatment option in MS patients of advanced age. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00787657.

Combination of (interferon beta-1b, lopinavir/ritonavir and ribavirin) versus favipiravir in hospitalized patients with non-critical COVID-19: A cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Our study aims at comparing the efficacy and safety of IFN-based therapy (lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, and interferon ß-1b) vs. favipiravir (FPV) in a cohort of hospitalized patients with non-critical COVID-19. METHODS: Single center observational study comparing IFN-based therapy (interferon ß-1b, ribavirin, and lopinavir/ritonavir) vs. FPV in non-critical hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Allocation to either treatment group was non-random but based on changes to national treatment protocols rather than physicians' selection (quasi-experimental). We examined the association between IFN-based therapy and 28-day mortality using Cox regression model with treatment as a time-dependent covariate. RESULTS: The study cohort included 222 patients, of whom 68 (28%) received IFN-based therapy. Antiviral therapy was started at a median of 5 days (3-6 days) from symptoms onset in the IFN group vs. 6 days (4-7 days) for the FPV group, P <0.0001. IFN-based therapy was associated with a lower 28-day mortality as compared to FPV (6 (9%) vs. 18 (12%)), adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] (95% Cl) = 0.27 (0.08-0.88)). No difference in hospitalization duration between the 2 groups, 9 (7-14) days vs. 9 (7-13) days, P = 0.732 was found. IFN treated group required less use of systemic corticosteroids (57%) as compared to FPV (77%), P = 0.005 after adjusting for disease severity and other confounders. Patients in the IFN treated group were more likely to have nausea and diarrhea as compared to FPV group (13%) vs. (3%), P = 0.013 and (18%) vs. (3%), P<0.0001, respectively. CONCLUSION: Early IFN-based triple therapy was associated with lower 28-days mortality as compared to FPV.

Role of interferon therapy in severe COVID-19: the COVIFERON randomized controlled trial.

Type 1 Interferons (IFNs) have been associated with positive effects on Coronaviruses. Previous studies point towards the superior potency of IFNß compared to IFNα against viral infections. We conducted a three-armed, individually-randomized, open-label, controlled trial of IFNß1a and IFNß1b, comparing them against each other and a control group. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to IFNß1a (subcutaneous injections of 12,000 IU on days 1, 3, 6), IFNß1b (subcutaneous injections of 8,000,000 IU on days 1, 3, 6), or the control group. All three arms orally received Lopinavir/Ritonavir (400 mg/100 mg twice a day for ten days) and a single dose of Hydroxychloroquine 400 mg on the first day. Our utilized primary outcome measure was Time To Clinical Improvement (TTCI) defined as the time from enrollment to discharge or a decline of two steps on the clinical seven-step ordinal scale, whichsoever came first. A total of 60 severely ill patients with positive RT-PCR and Chest CT scans underwent randomization (20 patients to each arm). In the Intention-To-Treat population, IFNß1a was associated with a significant difference against the control group, in the TTCI; (HR; 2.36, 95% CI 1.10-5.17, P-value = 0.031) while the IFNß1b indicated no significant difference compared with the control; HR; 1.42, (95% CI 0.63-3.16, P-value = 0.395). The median TTCI for both of the intervention groups was five days vs. seven days for the control group. The mortality was numerically lower in both of the intervention groups (20% in the IFNß1a group and 30% in the IFNß1b group vs. 45% in the control group). There were no significant differences between the three arms regarding the adverse events. In patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, as compared with the base therapeutic regiment, the benefit of a significant reduction in TTCI was observed in the IFNß1a arm. This finding needs further confirmation in larger studies.Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04343768. (Submitted: 08/04/2020; First Online: 13/04/2020) (Registration Number: NCT04343768).

Effect of a genetically engineered interferon-alpha versus traditional interferon-alpha in the treatment of moderate-to-severe COVID-19: a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: There are few effective therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) upon the outbreak of the pandemic. To compare the effectiveness of a novel genetically engineered recombinant super-compound interferon (rSIFN-co) with traditional interferon-alpha added to baseline antiviral agents (lopinavir-ritonavir or umifenovir) for the treatment of moderate-to-severe COVID-19. METHOD: In this multicenter randomized (1:1) trial, patients hospitalized with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 received either rSIFN-co nebulization or interferon-alpha nebulization added to baseline antiviral agents for no more than 28 days. The primary endpoint was the time to clinical improvement. Secondary endpoints included the overall rate of clinical improvement assessed on day 28, the time to radiological improvement and virus nucleic acid negative conversion. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included in the safety set (46 patients assigned to rSIFN-co group, 48 to interferon-alpha group). The time to clinical improvement was 11.5 days versus 14.0 days (95% CI 1.10 to 2.81, p = .019); the overall rate of clinical improvement on day 28 was 93.5% versus 77.1% (difference, 16.4%; 95% CI 3% to 30%); the time to radiological improvement was 8.0 days versus 10.0 days (p = .002), the time to virus nucleic acid negative conversion was 7.0 days versus 10.0 days (p = .018) in the rSIFN-co and interferon alpha arms, respectively. Adverse events were balanced with no deaths among groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: rSIFN-co was associated with a shorter time of clinical improvement than traditional interferon-alpha in the treatment of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 when combined with baseline antiviral agents. rSIFN-co therapy alone or combined with other antiviral therapy is worth to be further studied.Key messagesThere are few effective therapies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) upon the outbreak of the pandemic. Interferon alphas, by inducing both innate and adaptive immune responses, have shown clinical efficacy in treating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus.In this multicenter, head-to-head, randomized, clinical trial which included 94 participants with moderate-to-severe COVID-19, the rSIFN-co plus antiviral agents (lopinavir-ritonavir or umifenovir) was associated with a shorter time of clinical improvement than interferon-alpha plus antiviral agents.