Induction or escalation therapy for patients with multiple sclerosis?

被引:19
|
作者
Le Page, E. [1 ]
Edan, G. [1 ]
机构
[1] CHU Rennes, Dept Neurol, INCR, CIC P Inserm 02 03, 2 Rue Henri le Guilloux, F-35000 Rennes, France
关键词
Escalation; Multiple sclerosis; Induction; Drugs; Strategy; 5-YEAR FOLLOW-UP; INTERFERON BETA-1A; CONTROLLED TRIAL; MITOXANTRONE; ALEMTUZUMAB; NATALIZUMAB; DRUG; MULTICENTER; OCRELIZUMAB; CLADRIBINE;
D O I
10.1016/j.neurol.2018.04.004
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
The concept of induction followed by a long-term maintenance treatment has attracted much attention for the treatment of multiple sclerosis over the 30 past years. It was first demonstrated by the combination of induction therapy with mitoxantrone (six-monthly courses) followed by maintenance therapy with an immunomodulatory treatment such as an interferon-b or glatiramer acetate. Long-term observational studies confirmed that this therapeutic regimen provides a rapid reduction in disease activity and sustained disease control up to at least five years in 60% of patients. A better treatment response was observed in patients with early signs of aggressive disease, as shown in randomised studies (using six-monthly 12 mg/m(2) of mitoxantrone intravenously at a cumulative dose of 72 mg/m(2), followed by an interferon-b) as well as in long-term observational studies. But the safety profile of mitoxantrone make it more particularly suitable for young patients with frequent early relapses with incomplete recovery and multiple gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions or spinal cord lesions on magnetic resonance imaging. More recently approved, the second candidate for an induction strategy is alemtuzumab: phases II and III randomised studies showed the superiority of alemtuzumab 12 mg per day given intravenously for only five days and repeated for 3 days one year later, compared with interferon-b three times a week. Like with mitoxantrone, results supported the concept of long-term benefit after a short induction rather than escalation, in a subset of patients with early very active MS, with a sustained control of the disease for up to 7 years in 60% of patients in the phase III extension studies and in a long-term observational study. On the contrary, when alemtuzumab was first studied later in the disease course, results were disappointing. However, the risk of developing manageable but potentially severe systemic autoimmune diseases within the years following the last course of alemtuzumab make it, like mitoxantrone, more suitable for patients with early aggressive MS. More recently, cladribine an oral immunosuppressant, showed interesting results in a phase III study extension suggesting its potential induction effect, since after two cycles of treatment (5 days repeated 1 month later) at one year of interval, the remained low up to 4 years of follow-up, in the absence of any new treatment. However, today other immunosuppressive drugs have proved to be strongly and rapidly efficacious in treating highly active MS patients but through a mechanism of continuous immunosuppression (i.e., natalizumab and ocrelizumab). Indeed, disease activity can inflammatory process, which is the contrary of a mechanism of induction that is associated with a remnant effect. Taking into account advantages and disadvantages of the different DMDs, which enriched the today therapeutic arsenal for MS, we propose in this paper some algorithms summarizing our reflexion about using an escalation strategy or an induction strategy according to disease course and activity. (C) 2018 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:449 / 457
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Clinical Outcomes of Escalation vs Early Intensive Disease-Modifying Therapy in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis
    Harding, Katharine
    Williams, Owain
    Willis, Mark
    Hrastelj, James
    Rimmer, Anthony
    Joseph, Fady
    Tomassini, Valentina
    Wardle, Mark
    Pickersgill, Trevor
    Robertson, Neil
    Tallantyre, Emma
    JAMA NEUROLOGY, 2019, 76 (05) : 536 - 541
  • [22] Efficacy and safety of natalizumab as escalation and de-escalation therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis
    Putzki, N.
    Kollia, K.
    Katsarava, Z.
    Weber, R.
    Igwe, E.
    Woods, S.
    Diener, H.
    MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS, 2007, 13 : S170 - S171
  • [23] Induction versus escalation therapy
    V. Martinelli
    G. Comi
    Neurological Sciences, 2005, 26 : s193 - s199
  • [24] Induction versus escalation therapy
    Martinelli, V
    Comi, G
    NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2005, 26 (Suppl 4) : S193 - S199
  • [25] Induction Versus Escalation in Multiple Sclerosis: A 10-Year Real World Study
    Luca Prosperini
    Chiara Rosa Mancinelli
    Claudio Marcello Solaro
    Viviana Nociti
    Shalom Haggiag
    Cinzia Cordioli
    Laura De Giglio
    Nicola De Rossi
    Simonetta Galgani
    Sarah Rasia
    Serena Ruggieri
    Carla Tortorella
    Ruggero Capra
    Massimiliano Mirabella
    Claudio Gasperini
    Neurotherapeutics, 2020, 17 : 994 - 1004
  • [26] Induction Versus Escalation in Multiple Sclerosis: A 10-Year Real World Study
    Prosperini, Luca
    Mancinelli, Chiara Rosa
    Solaro, Claudio Marcello
    Nociti, Viviana
    Haggiag, Shalom
    Cordioli, Cinzia
    De Giglio, Laura
    De Rossi, Nicola
    Galgani, Simonetta
    Rasia, Sarah
    Ruggieri, Serena
    Tortorella, Carla
    Capra, Ruggero
    Mirabella, Massimiliano
    Gasperini, Claudio
    NEUROTHERAPEUTICS, 2020, 17 (03) : 994 - 1004
  • [27] Does initial high efficacy therapy in multiple sclerosis surpass escalation treatment strategy? A comparison of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in the Czech and Swedish national multiple sclerosis registries
    Hrnciarova, Tereza
    Drahota, Jiri
    Spelman, Tim
    Hillert, Jan
    Lycke, Jan
    Havrdova, Eva Kubala
    Recmanova, Eva
    Adamkova, Jana
    Mares, Jan
    Libertinova, Jana
    Pavelek, Zbysek
    Hradilek, Pavel
    Ampapa, Radek
    Stetkarova, Ivana
    Peterka, Marek
    Martinkova, Alena
    Stourac, Pavel
    Grunermelova, Marketa
    Vachova, Marta
    Dufek, Michal
    Horakova, Dana
    MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS AND RELATED DISORDERS, 2023, 76
  • [28] Escalation therapy for multiple sclerosis in Austria: analysis of gender differences in the nationwide registry
    Karamyan, Anush
    Guger, Michael
    Fertl, Elisabeth
    Berger, Thomas
    Seliner, Johann
    NEUROLOGY, 2017, 88
  • [29] Long-term escalation therapy with natalizumab in paediatric and adolescent multiple sclerosis
    Bayas, A.
    Pitarokoili, K.
    Penzien, J.
    Gold, R.
    Hellwig, K.
    MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL, 2011, 17 : S70 - S70
  • [30] Lateral and escalation therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a comparative study
    D'Amico, Emanuele
    Leone, Carmela
    ZanghAnot sign, Aurora
    Lo Fermo, Salvatore
    Patti, Francesco
    JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, 2016, 263 (09) : 1802 - 1809