open access

Vol 53, No 2 (2019)
Research paper
Published online: 2019-03-11
Submitted: 2018-11-06
Accepted: 2018-11-06
Get Citation

Early predictors of injectable disease modifying drugs suboptimal response based on clinical and radiological data assessment in Polish Multiple Sclerosis patients

Sławomir Wawrzyniak, Dorota Koziarska, Alina Kułakowska, Halina Bartosik-Psujek, Monika Adamczyk-Sowa
DOI: 10.5603/PJNNS.a2019.0010
·
Pubmed: 30855704
·
Neurol Neurochir Pol 2019;53(2):131-137.

open access

Vol 53, No 2 (2019)
Research paper
Published online: 2019-03-11
Submitted: 2018-11-06
Accepted: 2018-11-06

Abstract

Background. Prospective database studies can provide useful information regarding ‘real-world’ outcomes and drug efficacy.

Objective. To determine the early predictors of suboptimal treatment responses at two and three years under injectable Disease Modifying Therapy (DMT).

Methods. This was a multi-centre prospective database study. Adult patients who started injectable DMTs between January 2008 and June 2013 were included. The follow-up continued until July 2014. Suboptimal treatment responses were defined as: the presence of clinical relapse and/or Expanded Disability Status Score (EDSS) progression and/or newly emerging T2 lesions or/and gadolinium enhancing lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The parameters were assessed up to 24 months prior to, and every 12 months during, the treatment.

Results. Analysis included 297 MS (multiple sclerosis) patients followed for a mean time of 2.3 ± 1.3 years (range 1–5). Within the three years of observation, the persistence and efficacy with injectable DMTs was high. With increased disability, defined by EDSS ≥ 3, the risk of treatment failure increased up to seven times, OR 7.33 in the second year radiological analysis (CI 95% : 1.69–29.2) p < 0.01, similar to over two times in the second year clinical analysis, with the baseline symptomatic hemiparesis OR 2.75 (CI 95% : 1.06–7.06) p 0.034. A high relapse rate one year prior to treatment adversely influenced the treatment success at three years, OR 3.04 (CI 95% : 1.49–8.43) p < 0.01.

Conclusions . Injectable DMTs should not be chosen for treatment initiation in motoric disabled patients (EDSS ≥ 3) with a high grade of clinical activity. These drugs are effective in less active relapsing-remitting (RR) MS patients.

Abstract

Background. Prospective database studies can provide useful information regarding ‘real-world’ outcomes and drug efficacy.

Objective. To determine the early predictors of suboptimal treatment responses at two and three years under injectable Disease Modifying Therapy (DMT).

Methods. This was a multi-centre prospective database study. Adult patients who started injectable DMTs between January 2008 and June 2013 were included. The follow-up continued until July 2014. Suboptimal treatment responses were defined as: the presence of clinical relapse and/or Expanded Disability Status Score (EDSS) progression and/or newly emerging T2 lesions or/and gadolinium enhancing lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The parameters were assessed up to 24 months prior to, and every 12 months during, the treatment.

Results. Analysis included 297 MS (multiple sclerosis) patients followed for a mean time of 2.3 ± 1.3 years (range 1–5). Within the three years of observation, the persistence and efficacy with injectable DMTs was high. With increased disability, defined by EDSS ≥ 3, the risk of treatment failure increased up to seven times, OR 7.33 in the second year radiological analysis (CI 95% : 1.69–29.2) p < 0.01, similar to over two times in the second year clinical analysis, with the baseline symptomatic hemiparesis OR 2.75 (CI 95% : 1.06–7.06) p 0.034. A high relapse rate one year prior to treatment adversely influenced the treatment success at three years, OR 3.04 (CI 95% : 1.49–8.43) p < 0.01.

Conclusions . Injectable DMTs should not be chosen for treatment initiation in motoric disabled patients (EDSS ≥ 3) with a high grade of clinical activity. These drugs are effective in less active relapsing-remitting (RR) MS patients.

Get Citation

Keywords

multiple sclerosis, disease modifying treatment, annualised relapse rate, Expanded Disability Status Score, magnetic resonance imaging, RIO score, efficacy

About this article
Title

Early predictors of injectable disease modifying drugs suboptimal response based on clinical and radiological data assessment in Polish Multiple Sclerosis patients

Journal

Neurologia i Neurochirurgia Polska

Issue

Vol 53, No 2 (2019)

Pages

131-137

Published online

2019-03-11

DOI

10.5603/PJNNS.a2019.0010

Pubmed

30855704

Bibliographic record

Neurol Neurochir Pol 2019;53(2):131-137.

Keywords

multiple sclerosis
disease modifying treatment
annualised relapse rate
Expanded Disability Status Score
magnetic resonance imaging
RIO score
efficacy

Authors

Sławomir Wawrzyniak
Dorota Koziarska
Alina Kułakowska
Halina Bartosik-Psujek
Monika Adamczyk-Sowa

References (39)
  1. Brola W, Sobolewski P, Flaga S, et al. Increasing prevalence and incidence of multiple sclerosis in Poland. Neurologia i Neurochirurgia Polska. 2017; 51(1): 82–85.
  2. Rolak LA. Multiple sclerosis: it's not the disease you thought it was. Clin Med Res. 2003; 1(1): 57–60.
  3. Polman C, Reingold S, Edan G, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the “McDonald Criteria”. Annals of Neurology. 2005; 58(6): 840–846.
  4. Freedman MS, Selchen D, Arnold DL, et al. Canadian Multiple Sclerosis Working Group. Treatment optimization in MS: Canadian MS Working Group updated recommendations. Can J Neurol Sci. 2013; 40(3): 307–323.
  5. Interferon beta-1b is effective in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: I. Clinical results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Neurology. 1993; 43(4): 655–661.
  6. Johnson KP, Brooks BR, Cohen JA, et al. Copolymer 1 reduces relapse rate and improves disability in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: results of a phase III multicenter, double-blind placebo-controlled trial. The Copolymer 1 Multiple Sclerosis Study Group. Neurology. 1995; 45(7): 1268–1276.
  7. Jacobs LD, Cookfair DL, Rudick RA, et al. Intramuscular interferon beta-1a for disease progression in relapsing multiple sclerosis. The Multiple Sclerosis Collaborative Research Group (MSCRG). Ann Neurol. 1996; 39(3): 285–294.
  8. Randomised double-blind placebo-controlled study of interferon beta-1a in relapsing/remitting multiple sclerosis. PRISMS (Prevention of Relapses and Disability by Interferon beta-1a Subcutaneously in Multiple Sclerosis) Study Group. Lancet. 1998; 352(9139): 1498–1504.
  9. Ziemssen T, Stefano NDe, Sormani M, et al. Optimizing therapy early in multiple sclerosis: An evidence-based view. Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders. 2015; 4(5): 460–469.
  10. Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology. 1983; 33(11): 1444–1452.
  11. Sormani MP, Rio J, Tintorè M, et al. Scoring treatment response in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal. 2012; 19(5): 605–612.
  12. Río J, Nos C, Tintoré M, et al. Defining the response to interferon-beta in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients. Ann Neurol. 2006; 59(2): 344–352.
  13. Río J, Castilló J, Rovira A, et al. Measures in the first year of therapy predict the response to interferon β in MS. Multiple Sclerosis Journal. 2009; 15(7): 848–853.
  14. Rudick RA, Lee JC, Simon J, et al. Defining interferon beta response status in multiple sclerosis patients. Ann Neurol. 2004; 56(4): 548–555.
  15. Río J, Rovira À, Tintoré M, et al. Relationship between MRI lesion activity and response to IFN-β in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis patients. Multiple Sclerosis Journal. 2008; 14(4): 479–484.
  16. Río J, Comabella M, Montalban X. Predicting responders to therapies for multiple sclerosis. Nature Reviews Neurology. 2009; 5(10): 553–560.
  17. Havrdova E, Galetta S, Stefoski D, et al. Freedom from disease activity in multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 2010; 74(Issue 17, Supplement 3): S3–S7.
  18. Hyun JW, Kim SH, Jeong I, et al. Utility of the Rio Score and Modified Rio Score in Korean Patients with Multiple Sclerosis. PLOS ONE. 2015; 10(5): e0129243.
  19. Zhornitsky S, Greenfield J, Koch M, et al. Long-Term Persistence with Injectable Therapy in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: An 18-Year Observational Cohort Study. PLOS ONE. 2015; 10(4): e0123824.
  20. Oleen-Burkey M, Cyhaniuk A, Swallow E. Retrospective US database analysis of persistence with glatiramer acetate vs. available disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis: 2001–2010. BMC Neurology. 2014; 14(1).
  21. Mesaroš Š, Stojsavljević N, Dujmović-Bašuroski I, et al. Long-term adherence to interferon-beta treatment in a cohort of RRMS patients in Belgrade, Serbia. Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery. 2012; 114(8): 1145–1148.
  22. Limmroth V, Putzki N, Kachuck NJ. The interferon beta therapies for treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: are they equally efficacious? A comparative review of open-label studies evaluating the efficacy, safety, or dosing of different interferon beta formulations alone or in combination. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2011; 4(5): 281–296.
  23. Khan OA, Tselis AC, Kamholz JA, et al. A prospective, open-label treatment trial to compare the effect of IFNbeta-1a (Avonex), IFNbeta-1b (Betaseron), and glatiramer acetate (Copaxone) on the relapse rate in relapsing--remitting multiple sclerosis: results after 18 months of therapy. Mult Scler. 2001; 7(6): 349–353.
  24. Sorensen PS, Koch-Henriksen N, Ravnborg M, et al. Danish Multiple Sclerosis Study Group. Immunomodulatory treatment of multiple sclerosis in denmark: a prospective nationwide survey. Mult Scler. 2006; 12(3): 253–264.
  25. Hass J, Firzlaff M. Twenty-four-month comparison of immunomodulatory treatments - a retrospective open label study in 308 RRMS patients treated with beta interferons or glatiramer acetate (Copaxone). Eur J Neurol. 2005; 12(11): 916–917.
  26. Río J, Porcel J, Téllez N, et al. Factors related with treatment adherence to interferon beta and glatiramer acetate therapy in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2005; 11(3): 306–309.
  27. Cunningham A, Gottberg K, von Koch L, et al. Non-adherence to interferon-beta therapy in Swedish patients with multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand. 2010; 121(3): 154–160.
  28. Fernández O, Fernández V, Arbizu T, et al. Novo Group. Characteristics of multiple sclerosis at onset and delay of diagnosis and treatment in Spain (the Novo Study). J Neurol. 2010; 257(9): 1500–1507.
  29. Kułakowska A, Bartosik-Psujek H, Hożejowski R, et al. Selected aspects of the epidemiology of multiple sclerosis in Poland - a multicentre pilot study. Neurol Neurochir Pol. 2010; 44(5): 443–452.
  30. Margolis J, Fowler R, Johnson B, et al. Disease-modifying drug initiation patterns in commercially insured multiple sclerosis patients: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Neurology. 2011; 11(1).
  31. Wong J, Gomes T, Mamdani M, et al. Adherence to multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapies in Ontario is low. Can J Neurol Sci. 2011; 38(3): 429–433.
  32. Pittock SJ, Mayr WT, McClelland RL, et al. Disability profile of MS did not change over 10 years in a population-based prevalence cohort. Neurology. 2004; 62(4): 601–606.
  33. Limmroth V, Malessa R, Zettl UK, et al. QUASIMS Study Group. Quality Assessment in Multiple Sclerosis Therapy (QUASIMS): a comparison of interferon beta therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. J Neurol. 2007; 254(1): 67–77.
  34. Pittock SJ, Mayr WT, McClelland RL, et al. Disability profile of MS did not change over 10 years in a population-based prevalence cohort. Neurology. 2004; 62(4): 601–606.
  35. Limmroth V, Malessa R, Zettl UK, et al. QUASIMS Study Group. Quality Assessment in Multiple Sclerosis Therapy (QUASIMS): a comparison of interferon beta therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. J Neurol. 2007; 254(1): 67–77.
  36. Mikol DD, Barkhof F, Chang P, et al. REGARD study group. Comparison of subcutaneous interferon beta-1a with glatiramer acetate in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (the REbif vs Glatiramer Acetate in Relapsing MS Disease [REGARD] study): a multicentre, randomised, parallel, open-label trial. Lancet Neurol. 2008; 7(10): 903–914.
  37. Jokubaitis V, Spelman T, Lechner-Scott J, et al. The Australian Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Immunotherapy Study: A Prospective, Multicentre Study of Drug Utilisation Using the MSBase Platform. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8(3): e59694.
  38. Hartel M, Kluczewska E, Pierzchała K, et al. What you cannot get from routine MRI of MS patient and why - The growing need for atrophy assessment and seeing beyond the plaque. Neurol Neurochir Pol. 2016; 50(2): 123–130.
  39. Wingerchuk D, Carter J. Multiple Sclerosis: Current and Emerging Disease-Modifying Therapies and Treatment Strategies. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2014; 89(2): 225–240.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl