A post hoc evaluation of the shift in spasticity category in individuals with multiple sclerosis-related spasticity treated with nabiximols.

Background: Over 80% of individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS) experience MS-associated spasticity (MSS). In many European countries, after failure of first-line treatments, moderate or severe MSS can be treated with nabiximols, a cannabis-based add-on treatment. Objective: This post hoc analysis assessed the shift of participants treated with nabiximols from higher (severe or moderate) to lower (moderate or mild/none) spasticity. Methods: Previously published data from two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), GWSP0604 (NCT00681538) and SAVANT (EudraCT2015-004451-40), and one large real-world study (consistent with EU label), all enriched for responders, were re-analysed. Spasticity severity, measured using the 0-10 numerical rating scale (spasticity NRS), was categorised as none/mild (score <4), moderate (score ⩾4-7), or severe (score ⩾7). Results: In the two RCTs, the shift of participants with severe MSS into a lower category was significantly greater at week 12 for those receiving nabiximols versus placebo [GWSP0604: OR (95% CI), 4.4 (1.4, 14.2), p = 0.0125; SAVANT: 5.2 (1.2, 22.3), p = 0.0267]. In all three studies, over 80% of assessed patients with severe spasticity at baseline reported a shift into a lower category of spasticity after 12 weeks. Conclusions: A meaningful proportion of MSS patients treated with nabiximols shifted to a lower category of spasticity severity, typically maintained to the end of the 12-week study period.

Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of cannabinoid products in chronic pain conditions and for symptoms associated with multiple sclerosis: what do they tell us?

INTRODUCTION: To investigate whether published systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials provide sufficient clarity to inform prescribing of medicinal cannabinoid products, we examined their features and findings in two well-researched areas: chronic cancer/noncancer pain and multiple sclerosis (MS)-related symptoms. AREAS COVERED: Structured searches from January 2011 to 2 February 2021 identified 31 systematic reviews (with/without meta-analyses) that met the inclusion criteria. Support for the efficacy of cannabinoids was minimal in cancer pain, and somewhat stronger in noncancer (especially neuropathic) pain and MS spasticity. All systematic reviews and most meta-analyses grouped cannabinoid products together without appropriate consideration of their differential attributes (active constituent(s), concentration/strength, dosage forms, administration route), dosing regimens or treatment durations. Patient populations and efficacy outcome measures were inhomogeneous, particularly for studies in noncancer pain and MS. Separate results for specific cannabinoid formulations were rarely provided. EXPERT OPINION: The therapeutic effect of cannabinoids, as already demonstrated for some products, is not reflected clearly in the current range of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in chronic pain and MS. To truly inform evidence-based practice, future publications should aim to present results by individual product from well-conducted clinical trials using appropriate and homogeneous outcome measures in well-defined patient populations.

A real-world evidence study of nabiximols in multiple sclerosis patients with resistant spasticity: Analysis in relation to the newly described 'spasticity-plus syndrome'.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Nabiximols is a therapeutic option for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) spasticity whose symptoms are poorly controlled by conventional oral first-line medications. This study aimed to assess the relationship between changes in spasticity severity (measured on the 0-10 numeric rating scale [NRS]) and the presence of associated symptoms in patients treated with nabiximols, and to investigate the presence of the newly described 'spasticity-plus syndrome'. METHODS: We analyzed real-world data from the Italian Medicines Agency e-Registry on 1138 patients with MS spasticity who began treatment with nabiximols. Evaluation time points were baseline, 4 weeks, and 3, 6, 12 and 18 months after treatment start. RESULTS: Common symptoms associated with MS spasticity in this cohort were pain (38.4% at baseline), sleep disturbances (32.7%), and spasms/cramps (28.5%). Pain was frequently clustered with sleep disturbances (57.2% of pain cases) and spasms/cramps (43.9%). Approximately one-third of patients with data at all evaluation time points maintained treatment at 18 months. Nabiximols reduced the baseline mean spasticity 0-10 NRS score by 24.6% at Week 4, and by 33.9% at 18 months in treatment continuers. Nabiximols resolved a range of MS spasticity-associated symptoms at Week 4, and after 18 months in treatment continuers. CONCLUSION: This real-world analysis supports the concept of a spasticity-plus syndrome and suggests that nabiximols can favorably impact a range of spasticity-associated symptoms.

A systematic review of European regional and national guidelines: a focus on the recommended use of nabiximols in the management of spasticity in multiple sclerosis.

INTRODUCTION: Spasticity is a common, debilitating symptom of multiple sclerosis (MS) with several treatment options including the cannabinoid-based treatment, nabiximols. The purpose of this review was to examine the existing clinical practice guidelines that direct the management of multiple-sclerosis-associated spasticity (MSS), to identify areas of similarity and divergence, and suggest where standardization and improvement may be obtained. AREAS COVERED: Published literature (PubMed), websites of relevant European Medical Associations and Health Technology Assessment bodies were systematically searched to identify guidelines describing the pharmacological management of MSS, focussing on European countries where nabiximols (Sativex® oromucosal spray) is approved. Sixteen publicly available guidelines were identified. Analysis was focused on, but not restricted to, the use of nabiximols in the wider context of the pharmacological treatment of MSS. EXPERT OPINION/COMMENTARY: We believe that currently MSS is insufficiently treated and this would be improved if a clear and detailed set of guidelines were available and implemented in daily practice. We would welcome the update and amalgamation of the existing guidelines by an international panel, using an evidence-based approach, into a single guideline that is more detailed and standardized in its approach to the initiation, monitoring and optimization of anti-spasticity drugs.

People with multiple sclerosis often experience tight or stiff muscles and an inability to control those muscles. This is known as spasticity, which can have a devastating impact on a person's ability to carry out their daily activities. In addition to physiotherapy, doctors can prescribe various medicines to improve spasticity; these are known as anti-spasticity treatments. Often, prescription choices are steered by guideline documents, written by medical experts. These documents contain important information such as when to prescribe, what to prescribe, how much to prescribe and how to measure how well the treatment is working. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the guidelines that guide the prescription of anti-spasticity treatments in people with multiple sclerosis in Europe, are fit for purpose for day-to-day medical practice. In particular, this article examines how the guidelines represent the newer cannabis-based treatment known as nabiximols, sold under the name Sativex oromucosal spray, which has become more widely available in many European countries over the last 10 years.

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Tolerability of Nabiximols (THC:CBD) Oromucosal Spray versus Oral Dronabinol (THC) as Add-on Treatment for Severe Neuropathic Pain in Real-World Clinical Practice: Retrospective Analysis of the German Pain e-Registry.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of add-on treatment with nabiximols (NBX: delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol: cannabidiol) oromucosal spray or oral dronabinol (DRO: synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol) in patients with severe neuropathic pain poorly responsive to established treatments. METHODS: An analysis was conducted of anonymized, propensity score-matched real-world data from the German Pain e-Registry, using a sequential non-inferiority superiority approach, for adult outpatients with neuropathic pain who had initiated treatment with NBX or DRO between 10 March 2017 and 31 December 2019. The primary effectiveness variable was percent change from baseline in a 9-factor aggregated symptom relief (ASR-9) score, a composite index of nine distinct pain- and health-related parameters assessed using validated patient-reported instruments. Safety was assessed by the incidence of physician-confirmed treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and TRAEs leading to discontinuation. RESULTS: Propensity score-matched data were analyzed for 337 patients treated with NBX and 337 patients treated with DRO. Mean (standard deviation) THC dose over the 24-week evaluation period was 16.6 (6.5) mg for NBX and 17.2 (7.6) mg for DRO (p<0.001). Median (standard error) improvement relative to baseline in the ASR-9 composite score was 55.4% (0.5) for NBX and 40.5% (0.5) for DRO (least squares mean difference, 14.0 (0.7), 95% confidence interval 12.6-15.4; p<0.001), and incidences of TRAEs (21.1 vs 35%) and TRAE-related discontinuations (5.9 vs 14.8%) were significantly lower with NBX than DRO (p<0.001 for both), collectively indicating pre-specified non-inferiority and superiority of NBX. More NBX- than DRO-treated patients discontinued non-cannabinoid background pain medications and rescue analgesics, especially opioid analgesics (p<0.001 for both). CONCLUSION: Add-on treatment with cannabinoids is effective for treatment of severe neuropathic pain with inadequate response to established treatments. In daily practice, NBX had superior effectiveness and tolerability compared to DRO. The results emphasize the importance of combining CBD with THC in this patient population.

Effectiveness, Safety, and Tolerability of Nabiximols Oromucosal Spray vs Typical Oral Long-Acting Opioid Analgesics in Patients with Severe Neuropathic Back Pain: Analysis of 6-Month Real-World Data from the German Pain e-Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of add-on nabiximols (NBX) oromucosal spray vs typical oral long-acting opioid (LAO) analgesics in patients with severe (± chronic) peripheral neuropathic back pain poorly responsive to other treatments. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of anonymized, propensity score-matched data from the German Pain e-Registry of adult outpatients who initiated NBX or LAO between March 2017 and March 2020. RESULTS: Data were analyzed from propensity score-matched patients treated with NBX (n = 655) or LAO (n = 655): mean age ≈51 years; 57% female; mean pain duration ≈2.6 years; chronic pain 61%; severe dysfunctional pain 93%. At 6 months, NBX was noninferior to LAO for overall symptom relief, based on the least-squares mean difference between cohorts in change from baseline in patient-reported, pain-related aggregated nine-item scale scores (-27.84%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -29.71 to -25.96; P < 0.001) and individual pain-related scale scores. Subsequent prespecified superiority analysis of the primary endpoint showed that NBX was superior to LAO: all secondary endpoints measuring symptoms of pain and physical function improved significantly with NBX and LAO, with between-group differences favoring NBX (all P < 0.001). Fewer patients treated with NBX than LAO experienced treatment-related adverse events (25.5% vs 76.0%; P < 0.001) or discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events (7.9% vs 29.3%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Within study limitations (e.g., observational design, all potential biases), add-on NBX was superior to and better tolerated than add-on treatment with typical oral LAO analgesics in patients with neuropathic back pain inadequately controlled by recommended/established systemic therapies.

Review of Available Data for the Efficacy and Effectiveness of Nabiximols Oromucosal Spray (Sativex®) in Multiple Sclerosis Patients with Moderate to Severe Spasticity.

BACKGROUND: Sativex (USAN: nabiximols [NAB]) oromucosal spray is indicated for treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients with moderate to severe spasticity and inadequate response to other antispasticity medications who demonstrate clinically significant improvement during an initial trial of therapy. This narrative review investigated the efficacy and effectiveness of NAB oromucosal spray for moderate to severe MS spasticity by examining spasticity 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS) data from interventional and observational studies which featured a 4-week trial period as per the European Union-approved label. SUMMARY: Across both study types, clinically relevant and statistically significant reductions in mean MS spasticity 0-10 NRS scores were measured soon after treatment start and were maintained in the mid- to long term in treatment responders. Initial responder rates (≥20% NRS improvement from baseline at week 4) ranged from 47.6% to 81.4%, tending lower in the randomized clinical trials setting. Clinically relevant responder rates (≥30% NRS improvement from baseline at week 12) were similar between study types (range 30-41%) except for one outlier (74% in an observational study). Two open studies reported treatment continuation for ≥18 months in approximately half of patients who initiated treatment. In most longer term studies, symptomatic improvement in MS spasticity was maintained at mean daily dosages of about 6-7 sprays/day. Safety was consistent with the known profile of NAB. KEY MESSAGES: Experimental and observational studies of NAB oromucosal spray recorded similar findings. About half to two-thirds of MS patients who begin treatment will perceive initial symptomatic relief of spasticity within the 4-week trial period. About 40% of patients who initiate treatment will reach the ≥30% NRS improvement threshold at 3 months, comprising the majority of patients who continue long-term treatment. A trial of therapy with NAB is useful to identify patients most likely to gain longer term improvement in spasticity symptoms and discontinue those with insufficient benefit.

Safety and tolerability of nabiximols oromucosal spray: a review of more than 15 years" accumulated evidence from clinical trials.

Introduction: Nabiximols, a cannabinoid-based oromucosal spray, is indicated as add-on therapy for symptomatic relief of spasticity in persons with multiple sclerosis (MS). This review compiles tolerability and safety data from clinical trials that investigated nabiximols for spasticity and/or chronic pain.Areas covered: Systematic searches identified 38 placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or post-RCT open-label studies reporting safety data: 15 in spasticity; 16 in neuropathic pain; six in chronic cancer pain; and one in rheumatoid arthritis pain. In RCTs, discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) for nabiximols and placebo were lower in spasticity studies (5.4% and 2.8%) than in neuropathic pain (12.9% and 5.3%) or cancer pain (19.5% and 16.6%) studies. The most consistently identified AEs were dizziness, nausea and fatigue in spasticity or neuropathic pain studies; and dizziness, nausea, vomiting and somnolence in cancer pain studies. Serious AE (SAE) rates for nabiximols and placebo were higher in cancer pain (21.8% and 16.9%) than in MS spasticity (4.7% vs. 0.8%) and neuropathic pain (4.1% vs. 3.1%) studies despite similar dose ranges. Treatment-related SAEs showed no particular pattern.Expert opinion: More than 15 years of investigation of nabiximols oromucosal spray in spasticity and chronic pain conditions indicates an acceptable overall safety profile.

Cost-effectiveness of adding Sativex® spray to spasticity care in Belgium: using bootstrapping instead of Monte Carlo simulation for probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty in model-based cost-utility analyses is commonly assessed in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Model parameters are implemented as distributions and values are sampled from these distributions in a Monte Carlo simulation. Bootstrapping is an alternative method that requires fewer assumptions and incorporates correlations between model parameters. METHODS: A Markov model-based cost-utility analysis comparing oromucosal spray containing delta-9-tetrahidrocannabinol + cannabidiol (Sativex®, nabiximols) plus standard care versus standard spasticity care alone in the management of multiple sclerosis spasticity was performed over a 5-year time horizon from the Belgian healthcare payer perspective. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis was implemented using a bootstrap approach to ensure that the correlations present in the source clinical trial data were incorporated in the uncertainty estimates. RESULTS: Adding Sativex® spray to standard care was found to dominate standard spasticity care alone, with cost savings of €6,068 and a quality-adjusted life year gain of 0.145 per patient over the 5-year analysis. The probability of dominance increased from 29% in the first year to 94% in the fifth year, with the probability of QALY gains in excess of 99% for all years considered. CONCLUSIONS: Adding Sativex® spray to spasticity care was found to dominate standard spasticity care alone in the Belgian healthcare setting. This study showed the use of bootstrapping techniques in a Markov model probabilistic sensitivity analysis instead of Monte Carlo simulations. Bootstrapping avoided the need to make distributional assumptions and allowed the incorporation of correlating structures present in the original clinical trial data in the uncertainty assessment.

Safety and tolerability of nabiximols oromucosal spray: a review of real-world experience in observational studies, registries, and case reports.

INTRODUCTION: : Nabiximols oromucosal spray,a cannabis-based medicine containing a balanced ratio of Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol, is approved widely as an add-on therapy for symptomatic relief of spasticity in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Most safety data for nabiximols derive from use in MS spasticity, with some data available from the analgesia area. AREAS COVERED: : This review compiles safety and tolerability data from all published observational studies, registry analyses, and case reports identified in systematic searches in which nabiximols oromucosal spray was investigated for spasticity (n = 20) and/or chronic non-cancer pain (n = 4). Aligning with the known safety profile of nabiximols as demonstrated in randomized controlled trials, common adverse events reported consistently across studies conducted under clinical practice conditions were dizziness, fatigue and somnolence. The serious adverse event (SAE) rate with nabiximols in MS spasticityobservational studies was 3.1% (137/4351). A total of 39 treatment-related SAEs were reported in 32 patients with spasticity, all of which (where specified) were resolved. No treatment-related SAEs were recorded in nabiximols pain studies. EXPERT OPINION: : Real-world experience with nabiximols oromucosal spray in treating spasticity and chronic pain indicates that, overall, it is well tolerated and has a good safety profile.

Tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol oromucosal spray in resistant multiple sclerosis spasticity: consistency of response across subgroups from the SAVANT randomized clinical trial.

Objective: To determine whether differences in disability status, spasticity severity, and spasticity duration at treatment start in patients with resistant multiple sclerosis (MS) spasticity might influence response to add-on tetrahydrocannabinol:cannabidiol (THC:CBD) oromucosal spray (nabiximols) versus further re-adjustment of optimized first-line antispasticity medication.Methods: Using the database from the Sativex® as Add-on therapy Vs. further optimized first-line ANTispastics (SAVANT) study, this post hoc analysis evaluated spasticity severity (0-10 numerical rating scale [NRS] scores) and pain severity (0-10 NRS scores) evolution from randomization (baseline) to week 12 (end of double-blind treatment) in defined subgroups: Expanded disability status scale [EDSS] score subgroups (<6 and ≥6); spasticity severity 0-10 NRS score subgroups (4 to ≤6 and >6), and spasticity duration subgroups (<5 and ≥5 years).Results: THC:CBD oromucosal spray (nabiximols) halved mean severity scores for spasticity and pain in all subgroups. Active treatment significantly improved mean spasticity severity scores versus placebo from week 4 onwards in both EDSS subgroups, in the severe spasticity subgroup, and in both spasticity duration subgroups. Active treatment significantly improved mean pain severity scores versus placebo in the ≥6 EDSS subgroup, in the severe spasticity subgroup and in both spasticity duration subgroups.Conclusion: Add-on THC:CBD oromucosal spray (nabiximols) consistently relieves resistant spasticity across subgroups defined by baseline EDSS score, spasticity severity NRS score and spasticity duration. Patients with moderate resistant MS spasticity benefit numerically from treatment; patients with severe resistant spasticity achieve significant therapeutic gains. Spasticity-associated pain often improves similarly in the same subgroups.

Application device for THC:CBD oromucosal spray in the management of resistant spasticity: pre-production testing.

Background: Patients with multiple sclerosis spasticity (MSS) and upper limb/hand impairment who are taking 9-delta-tetrahydrocannabinol:cannabidiol (THC:CBD) oromucosal spray (Sativex®) may have difficulty self-administering their medication, possibly limiting adherence and treatment effectiveness. A Class I EU device is available to support the administration of THC:CBD spray. Pre-production testing was undertaken in a patient sample. Methods: Current users of THC:CBD spray were recruited to review the instruction leaflet and test the device. Patients and observing health-care professionals (HCP) completed a purpose-designed questionnaire which captured user experience and HCP opinion. Results: Fifteen patients participated. Mean treatment time with THC:CBD spray was 4 (range: 0.1-6.1) years. 87% of participants 'always', 'often' or 'sometimes' had hand impairment, and 53% reported difficulty administering THC:CBD spray. Participants reported better application using the device (73%), with less strength required (54%). Most participants (93%) considered the instruction leaflet to be clear and many (66%) expressed interest in using the device. Most HCPs (93%) did not foresee any difficulties in use of the device. Conclusion: The proposed adherence device was useful to address self-application difficulties with THC:CBD spray in our sample. Providing the device to MSS patients with upper limb/hand spasticity impairment may restore autonomy and support adherence to THC:CBD spray.