| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Longinetti, E., et al.
(författare)
-
SARS-COV2 exposure rates and serological response of people living with MS
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Multiple Sclerosis Journal. - : Sage Publications. - 1352-4585 .- 1477-0970. ; 28:Suppl. 3, s. 515-516
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Introduction: Some multiple sclerosis (MS) disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are associated with blunted humoral vaccination responses, but relevance for SARS-CoV-2 infection is unclear.Objectives: To determine SARS-CoV-2 exposure rates and formation of antibody memory among participants of the COMparison Between All immunoTherapies for MS (COMBAT-MS; NCT03193866) and the Immunomodulation and MS Epidemiology (IMSE) studies.Aim: To determine SARS-CoV2 serological response of people living with MS (pwMS).Methods: Using a multiplex bead-based assay we determined SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid antibody levels in 3,723 pwMS in paired serum samples (n=7,157) donated prior (Results: Specificity and sensitivity of the assay for SARS-CoV-2 was 100% and 99.7%, respectively. The proportion of positive samples for SARS-CoV-2 differed moderately across DMTs with the highest values among cladribine-treated (7.4%) and the lowest number among rituximab-treated pwMS (3.9%). Similarly, the proportion of positive cases not reported in the Swedish MS registry varied from 100% for cladribine to 33.3% among untreated pwMS. Comparing levels of antibodies titers showed that levels were lower among those treated with rituximab or fingolimod vs interferon treated pwMS. Point estimates indicated a similar trend comparing rituximab or fingolimod vs untreated pwMS.Conclusions: Overall rates of SARS-CoV-2 antibody positivity after the first COVID-19 wave differed only moderately across DMTs, while antibody levels were lower with rituximab or fingolimod compared to interferon-treated pwMS. This indicates quantitative rather than qualitative differences in the humoral response to infection.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Svenningsson, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Safety and efficacy of rituximab versus dimethyl fumarate in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis or clinically isolated syndrome in Sweden: a rater-blinded, phase 3, randomised controlled trial
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Lancet Neurology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1474-4422. ; 21:8, s. 693-703
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background B-cell depleting therapies are highly efficacious in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis but one such therapy, rituximab, is not approved for multiple sclerosis and no phase 3 trial data are available. We therefore examined the safety and efficacy of rituximab compared with dimethyl fumarate in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis to obtain data that might allow inclusion of rituximab in treatment guidelines. Methods RIFUND-MS was a multicentre, rater-blinded, active-comparator, phase 3, randomised controlled trial done at 17 Swedish university and community hospitals. Key inclusion criteria for participants were: age 18-50 years; relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis or clinically isolated syndrome according to prevailing McDonald criteria; 10 years or less since diagnosis; untreated or only exposed to interferons or glatiramer acetate; and with clinical or neuroradiological disease activity in the past year. Patients were automatically randomly assigned (1:1) by the treating physician using a randomisation module in the Swedish multiple sclerosis registry, without stratification, to oral dimethyl fumarate 240 mg twice daily or to intravenous rituximab 1000 mg followed by 500 mg every 6 months. Relapse evaluation, Expanded Disability Status Scale rating, and assessment of MRI scans were done by examining physicians and radiologists masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with at least one relapse (defined as subacute onset of new or worsening neurological symptoms compatible with multiple sclerosis with a duration of more than 24 h and preceded by at least 30 days of clinical stability), assessed in an intention-to-treat analysis using log-binomial regression with robust standard errors. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02746744. Findings Between July 1, 2016, and Dec 18, 2018, 322 patients were screened for eligibility, 200 of whom were randomly assigned to a treatment group (100 assigned to rituximab and 100 assigned to dimethyl fumarate). The last patient completed 24-month follow-up on April 21, 2021. 98 patients in the rituximab group and 97 patients in the dimethyl fumarate group were eligible for the primary outcome analysis. Three (3%) patients in the rituximab group and 16 (16%) patients in the dimethyl fumarate group had a protocol-defined relapse during the trial, corresponding to a risk ratio of 0.19 (95% CI 0.06-0.62; p=0.0060). Infusion reactions (105 events [40.9 per 100 patient-years]) in the rituximab group and gastrointestinal reactions (65 events [47.4 per 100 patient-years]) and flush (65 events [47.4 per 100 patient-years]) in the dimethyl fumarate group were the most prevalent adverse events. There were no safety concerns. Interpretation RIFUND-MS provides evidence that rituximab given as 1000 mg followed by 500 mg every 6 months is superior to dimethyl fumarate in preventing relapses over 24 months in patients with early relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Health economic and long-term safety studies of rituximab in patients with multiple sclerosis are needed.
|
|
