Risk of secondary progression in patients with highly active multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab: a real-life study

Louisa Scherer1, Marc Soudant2, Sophie Pittion-Vouyovitch1, Marc Debouverie3,1, Francis Guillemin2,3, Jonathan Epstein2,3, Guillaume Mathey3,1
1Department of Neurology, Nancy University Hospital, Nancy, France
2CIC, Epidémiologie Clinique, CHRU-Nancy, Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France
3Université de Lorraine, INSPIIRE, INSERM, Nancy, France

Tóm tắt

one of the most important therapeutic goals in relapse-onset multiple sclerosis is to preclude conversion to secondary progression. Our objective was to determine the risk of progression associated with natalizumab treatment in an registry-based cohort of patients and to identify determinant factors. Patients with relapse-onset multiple sclerosis from the Registre Lorrain des Scléroses en Plaques (ReLSEP) were included if they had received one infusion of natalizumab between 2002 and 2021. The risk of secondary progression was determined using a standardized definition and a multi-state estimator to account for the possibility of stopping natalizumab before progression, and analyzed with multivariate Cox models. 574 patients were followed up for a median of 6.7 years. Of the 304 who stopped NTZ before progression onset, the probabilities (95% confidence interval) to convert to progression after 1, 2, 5 and 10 years were 3.2% (2.0–4.8%), 5.3% (3.6–7.3%), 17.5% (14.3–21.3%) and 28.3% (23.7–33.7%), respectively. Discontinuation of NTZ during follow-up was significantly associated with an increased risk of conversion in case of no resumption of a highly active treatment thereafter (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.7; 95% confidence interval 1.5–4.9; p = 0.001). The use of such a treatment was associated with a lower risk of progression (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.42; 95% confidence interval 0.23–0.79; p = 0.007). the risk of conversion to secondary progression associated with natalizumab treatment is relatively low but increases in case of natalizumab discontinuation in the absence of switch to highly active immunosuppressant.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Weinshenker BG, Bass B, Rice GP et al (1989) The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study. I Clin Course Disabil Brain 112(Pt 1):133–146 Tremlett H, Zhao Y, Devonshire V (2008) Natural history of secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 14:314–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458507084264 Scalfari A, Neuhaus A, Daumer M et al (2014) Onset of secondary progressive phase and long-term evolution of multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 85:67–75. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2012-304333 Brown JWL, Coles A, Horakova D et al (2019) Association of initial disease-modifying therapy with later conversion to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. JAMA 321:175–187. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.20588 Polman CH, Miller DH, Wajgt A, Sandrock AW (2006) A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 12:899 Rudick RA, Stuart WH, Calabresi PA et al (2006) Natalizumab plus interferon beta-1a for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 354:911–923. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa044396 Zivadinov R, Hojnacki D, Bergsland N et al (2016) Effect of natalizumab on brain atrophy and disability progression in multiple sclerosis patients over 5 years. Eur J Neurol 23:1101–1109. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.12992 Graf J, Leussink VI, Soncin G et al (2021) Relapse-independent multiple sclerosis progression under natalizumab. Brain Commun 3:fcab229. https://doi.org/10.1093/braincomms/fcab229 Butzkueven H, Kappos L, Wiendl H et al (2020) Long-term safety and effectiveness of natalizumab treatment in clinical practice: 10 years of real-world data from the Tysabri Observational Program (TOP). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 91:660–668. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2019-322326 Rae-Grant A, Day GS, Marrie RA et al (2018) Practice guideline recommendations summary: disease-modifying therapies for adults with multiple sclerosis: report of the guideline development, dissemination, and implementation subcommittee of the american academy of neurology. Neurology 90:777–788. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000005347 Debouverie M, Pittion-Vouyovitch S, Louis S et al (2008) Natural history of multiple sclerosis in a population-based cohort. Eur J Neurol 15:916–921. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-1331.2008.02241.x El Adssi H, Debouverie M, Guillemin F, LORSEP Group (2012) Estimating the prevalence and incidence of multiple sclerosis in the Lorraine region, France, by the capture-recapture method. Mult Scler 18:1244–1250. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458512437811 Thompson AJ, Banwell BL, Barkhof F et al (2018) Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol 17:162–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30470-2 Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L et al (1983) New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol 13:227–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410130302 Kurtzke JF (1983) Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 33:1444–1444. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.33.11.1444 Confavreux C, Compston DA, Hommes OR et al (1992) EDMUS, a European database for multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 55:671–676. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.55.8.671 Lorscheider J, Buzzard K, Jokubaitis V et al (2016) Defining secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Brain 139:2395–2405. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/aww173 Katz Sand I, Krieger S, Farrell C, Miller AE (2014) Diagnostic uncertainty during the transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 20:1654–1657. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458514521517 Davies F, Wood F, Brain KE et al (2016) The transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: an exploratory qualitative study of health professionals’ experiences. Int J MS Care 18:257–264. https://doi.org/10.7224/1537-2073.2015-062 Aalen O (1978) Nonparametric estimation of partial transition probabilities in multiple decrement models. Ann Stat 6:534–545. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344198 Therneau TM, Grambsch PM, Fleming TR (1990) Martingale-based residuals for survival models. Biometrika 77:147–160. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/77.1.147 Eilers PHC, Marx BD (1996) Flexible smoothing with B-splines and penalties. Stat Sci 11:89–121. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1038425655 Venables WN, Ripley BD (2002) Modern Applied Statistics with S. Springer, New York, NY Auer M, Zinganell A, Hegen H et al (2021) Experiences in treatment of multiple sclerosis with natalizumab from a real-life cohort over 15 years. Sci Rep 11:23317. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02665-6 Bigaut K, Fabacher T, Kremer L et al (2021) Long-term effect of natalizumab in patients with RRMS: TYSTEN cohort. Mult Scler 27:729–741. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458520936239 Sorensen PS, Koch-Henriksen N, Petersen T et al (2014) Recurrence or rebound of clinical relapses after discontinuation of natalizumab therapy in highly active MS patients. J Neurol 261:1170–1177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-014-7325-8 Prosperini L, Kinkel RP, Miravalle AA et al (2019) Post-natalizumab disease reactivation in multiple sclerosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 12:1756286419837809. https://doi.org/10.1177/1756286419837809 Roos I, Malpas C, Leray E et al (2022) Disease reactivation after cessation of disease-modifying therapy in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Neurology 99:e1926–e1944. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000201029 Prosperini L, Annovazzi P, Capobianco M et al (2015) Natalizumab discontinuation in patients with multiple sclerosis: profiling risk and benefits at therapeutic crossroads. Mult Scler 21:1713–1722. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458515570768 Hellwig K, Tokic M, Thiel S et al (2022) Multiple sclerosis disease activity and disability following discontinuation of natalizumab for pregnancy. JAMA Netw Open 5:e2144750. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.44750 Stankoff B, Mrejen S, Tourbah A et al (2007) Age at onset determines the occurrence of the progressive phase of multiple sclerosis. Neurology 68:779–781. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000256732.36565.4a Scalfari A, Neuhaus A, Daumer M et al (2011) Age and disability accumulation in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 77:1246–1252. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e318230a17d Confavreux C, Vukusic S (2006) Natural history of multiple sclerosis: a unifying concept. Brain 129:606–616. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awl007