prospects for individualised therapy for ms
TRANSCRIPT
Prospects for individualised
therapy for MS
Gavin Giovannoni
Treat early and actively: who should decide?
Natural course of disease
Later intervention
Later treatment
Treatment at diagnosis Intervention
at diagnosis
Time Disease Onset
Who should decide?
WWW.MS-RES.ORG
WWW.MS-RES.ORG
WWW.MS-RES.ORG
UK Payers or NHS: relapsing MS DMT doughnut
Inactive RRMS
CIS
RIS or asymptomatic MS
Suboptimal responders ?
Clinically active RRMS
Highly active Band 3
(Alemtuzumab) (Ocrelizumab) Natalizumab (Daclizumab)
Band 2 (Cladribine) Fingolimod
(BG12/DMF)
Band 1 (Teriflunomide) Interferon-beta
Glatiramer acetate (Laquinimod)
Sub-clinically active RRMS
MS DMT doughnut: 1st, 2nd & 3rd line therapies
Band 3 (Alemtuzumab) (Ocrelizumab) Natalizumab (Daclizumab)
Band 2 (Cladribine) Fingolimod
(BG12/DMF)
Band 1 (Teriflunomide) Interferon-beta
Glatiramer acetate (Laquinimod)
Inactive R
RM
S
CIS
RIS o
r asymp
tom
atic MS
Sub
op
timal resp
on
ders ?
Clin
ically active
RR
MS
High
ly active
Sub
-clinically active R
RM
S
Eating the doughnut:
Band 3: (Alemtuzumab) / (Ocrelizumab) / Natalizumab / (Daclizumab)
Band 2: (Cladribine) / Fingolimod / (BG12/DMF)
Band 1: (Teriflunomide) / Interferon-beta / Glatiramer acetate / (Laquinimod)
Sub
op
timal resp
on
ders ?
Inactive R
RM
S
CIS
RIS o
r asymp
tom
atic MS
Clin
ically active
RR
MS
High
ly active
Sub
-clinically active R
RM
S
Coles et al. J Neurol. 2006 Jan;253(1):98-108..
Post-inflammatory neurodegeneration
Hartung et al. Lancet 2002:360:2018-25.
Coles AJ et al. Lancet 2012
Alemtuzumab for patients with relapsing MS after disease-modifying
therapy: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial
survival
analysis
median or
mean EDSS
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
0 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
Hazard ratio 0.53 (95% CI 0.41-0.69); p<0.0001
IFNβ-1a
Alemtuzumab 12 mg
202
426
190
402
139
377
125
354
109
325
101
313
94
303
90
291
79
266
Number at risk
IFNβ-1a
Alemtuzumab 12 mg
Re
lapse-f
ree s
urv
iva
l
30
25
20
15
10
5
0 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
Hazard ratio 0.58 (95% CI 0.38-0.87); p=0.0084
IFNβ-1a
Alemtuzumab 12 mg
202
426
200
426
184
412
175
404
167
392
162
384
155
380
145
375
131
154
Number at risk
IFNβ-1a
Alemtuzumab 12 mg
Pa
tien
ts w
ith
su
sta
ined
accum
ula
tion
of
dis
abili
ty (
%)
3.25
3.00
2.75
2.50
2.25 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
IFNβ-1a
Alemtuzumab 12 mg
202
426
198
419
194
419
190
419
185
422
180
415
176
410
172
413
174
413
Number of observations
IFNβ-1a
Alemtuzumab 12 mg
ED
SS
sco
re
We don’t want to throw the baby out with the bathwater!
survival analysis
What is your treatment philosophy?
maintenance-escalation vs. induction
survival analysis
“hit hard and early ”
What is your treatment philosophy?
maintenance-escalation vs. induction
survival analysis
“hit hard and early ”
MS is an autoimmune disease hypothesis
15-20 year experiment
What is your treatment philosophy?
maintenance-escalation vs. induction
Clinical Prognostic Factors
Good Prognosis
1. Optic neuritis
2. Isolated sensory
symptoms
3. Long interval to
second relapse
4. No disability after
5 years
5. Normal MRI or low
lesion load
Poor Prognosis
1. Multifocal CIS
2. Efferent systems
affected
3. High relapse rate in first
2–5 years
4. Substantial disability
after 5 years
5. Abnormal MRI with large
lesion load
Miller D et al. Lancet Neurol. 2005;4:281-288.
vs.
1
2
3
Clinical
MRI
NABs
100 MSers
Who are the responders?
~20% responders
~40% sub-optimal responders
~40% non-responders
Relapses don’t count!
Relapses and residual deficits
Lublin FD et al. Neurology. 2003;61:1528-1532.
Relapse on IFNβ Therapy Increases Risk
of Sustained Disability Progression
Bosca et al. Mult Scler. 2008;14:636-639.
HR SE P Value 95% CI
No relapses (reference=1) 1
One relapse 3.41 1.47 0.005 1.46–7.98
Two or more relapses 4.37 1.74 0.000 1.90–9.57
HR of EDSS Increase in Patients with No Relapses, 1 Relapse, and 2 or More Relapses During the First 2 Years of IFN Treatment
0 20 40 60 80
0
0.25
0.50
0.75
Analysis Time (Months)
No Relapses One Relapse Two or More Relapses
1.00
EDSS
Pro
gres
sio
n
Surv
ival
Pro
bab
ility
HR=hazard ratio; SE=standard error
Predictors of long-term outcome in
MSers treated with interferon beta-1a
Bermel et al. Ann Neuol 2012; In Press.
Bermel et al. Ann Neuol 2012; In Press.
Predictors of long-term outcome in MSers treated with interferon beta-a
Bermel et al. Ann Neuol 2012; In Press.
Predictors of long-term outcome in MSers treated with interferon beta-a
Bermel et al. Ann Neuol 2012; In Press.
Predictors of long-term outcome in
MSers treated with interferon beta-1a
MRI activity doesn’t count!
Bermel et al. Ann Neuol 2012; In Press.
Predictors of long-term outcome in
MSers treated with interferon beta-1a
MRI to monitor treatment response to IFNβ: a meta-analysis
Dobson et al. Submitted 2012.
Study or Subgroup Odds Ratio
IV, Random, 95% CI
Kinkel 2008
Prosperini 2009
Total (95% CI) 9.86 (2.33, 41.70)
Study or Subgroup Odds Ratio
IV, Random, 95% CI
Kinkel 2008
Pozzilli 2005
Prosperini 2009
Sormani 2011
Total (95% CI) 2.69 (0.72, 10.04)
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Disease Less Likely Disease More Likely
One New T2 Lesion
Favors Experimental Favors Control
100 10 1 0.1 0.01
Two or More New T2 Lesions
Study or Subgroup Odds Ratio
IV, Random, 95% CI
Kinkel 2008
Rio 2008
Total (95% CI) 5.46 (2.48, 12.04)
MRI to monitor treatment response to IFNβ: a meta-analysis
Dobson et al. Submitted 2012.
Study or Subgroup Odds Ratio
IV, Random, 95% CI
Kinkel 2008
Pozzilli 2005
Tomassini 2006
Total (95% CI) 3.34 (1.36, 8.22)
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Disease Less Likely Disease More Likely
One New Gd+ Lesion
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Disease Less Likely Disease More Likely
Two or More New Gd+ Lesions
Disease progression doesn’t count!
Strongest predictor of disability progression on
IFNβ therapy is progression itself
Disease activity during 2 years of treatment and prediction of disability
progression* at 6 years
Group Sensitivity (%)
(CI) Specificity (%)
(CI)
A. An increase of at least one EDSS step confirmed at 6 months 85 (64–95) 93 (86–97)
B. Occurrence of any relapse 80 (58–92) 51 (41–61)
C. Occurrence of two or more relapses 45 (26–66) 81 (72–82)
D. A decrease in relapse rate less than 30% compared with 2 years before therapy
40 (22–61) 86 (77–91)
E. A decrease in relapse rate less than 50% compared with 2 years before therapy
40 (–61) 81 (72–88)
F. No decrease or identical relapse rate compared with 2 years before therapy
35 (18–57) 88 (79–93)
G. Definition A or B 90 (70–97) 48 (38–58)
H. Definition A or E 85 (64–95) 76 (66–83)
I. Definition A and B 75 (53–89) 97 (91–99)
J. Definition A and E 40 (22–61) 99 (94–99)
*EDSS score ≥6.0 or increase in at least 3 EDSS steps.
Río J et al. Ann Neurol. 2006;59:344-352.
Relationship between early clinical characteristics and long term disability
outcomes: 16 year cohort study (follow-up) of the pivotal interferon b-1b trial
Goodin et al. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2012 Mar;83(3):282-7.
How would you define a MS cure?
How would you define a MS cure?
"To claim that someone has been cured of MS
one would have to show that the person who
had the disease had no disease activity for at
least 15 years. The latter would be a composite
of no MRI activity (new gadolinium-enhancing
lesions, new T2 or enlarging T2 lesions and a
lack of progressive whole brain atrophy) and no
clinical activity (relapses or disease
progression).“
GIOVANNONI; WWW.MS-RES.ORG: FRIDAY, 6 APRIL 2012.
Emerging concepts in MS
NEDD; no evidence of detectable disease
T2T; treat-2-target
40
Treat-2-target
NEDA
Treat-2-target “an individualised target”
NEDA
Armour “population budgets”
LET’s MAKE IT A DOUGHNUT FREE ZONE!
Conclusions
• NEDA, T2T and DAF have entered the neurology lexicon
• We need an acceptable working definition of an MS cure
• DAF x 15 years?
• Should the definition be disease-stage specific?
• How do we deal with maintenance and induction therapies?
• Maintenance - absence of NEDA status indicates non-response
• Induction – absence of NEDA status indicates a time to retreat
• Improve risk mitigation tool
• Who should make the decision re early aggressive treatment?
• Regulators
• Payers
• Neurologists
• MSers
• Is it fair to make MSers wait 20 years for the outcome of an experiment?
• For example, alemtuzumab extension study
• Have we finally entered the era of individualised therapy for MS?