Explore the vast range of titles available.

AimAn exploratory study of the relationship between cumulative exposure to subcutaneous (sc) interferon (IFN) β-1a treatment and other possible prognostic factors with long-term clinical outcomes in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).MethodsPatients in the original PRISMS study were invited to a single follow-up visit 15 years after initial randomisation (PRISMS-15). Outcomes over 15 years were compared in the lowest and highest quartile of the cumulative sc IFN β-1a dose groups, and according to total time receiving sc IFN β-1a as a continuous variable per 5 years of treatment. Potential prognostic factors for outcomes were analysed.ResultsOf 560 patients randomised in PRISMS, 291 returned for PRISMS-15 and 290 (51.8%) were analysed. Higher cumulative dose exposure and longer treatment time appeared to be associated with better outcomes on: annualised relapse rate, number of relapses, time to Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) progression, change in EDSS, proportions of patients with EDSS ≥4 or ≥6, ≤5 relapses and EDSS <4 or <6, and time to conversion to secondary-progressive MS (SPMS). Higher dose exposure was associated with lower proportions of patients with EDSS progression and conversion to SPMS, and longer time on treatment with lower risk of first relapse. Change in EDSS from baseline to 24 months was a strong predictor of evaluated clinical outcomes over 15 years.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that higher cumulative exposure to sc IFN β-1a may be associated with better clinical outcomes, and early change in EDSS score may have prognostic value, over many years, in RRMS.

The authors report interim results of the WHO Solidarity trial of four repurposed antiviral drugs — remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, and interferon beta-1a — in patients hospitalized with Covid-19. Effects on overall mortality, initiation of ventilation, and duration of hospital stay are compared.

The Solidarity trial among COVID-19 inpatients has previously reported interim mortality analyses for four repurposed antiviral drugs. Lopinavir, hydroxychloroquine, and interferon (IFN)-β1a were discontinued for futility but randomisation to remdesivir continued. Here, we report the final results of Solidarity and meta-analyses of mortality in all relevant trials to date. Solidarity enrolled consenting adults (aged ≥18 years) recently hospitalised with, in the view of their doctor, definite COVID-19 and no contraindication to any of the study drugs, regardless of any other patient characteristics. Participants were randomly allocated, in equal proportions between the locally available options, to receive whichever of the four study drugs (lopinavir, hydroxychloroquine, IFN-β1a, or remdesivir) were locally available at that time or no study drug (controls). All patients also received the local standard of care. No placebos were given. The protocol-specified primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality, subdivided by disease severity. Secondary endpoints were progression to ventilation if not already ventilated, and time-to-discharge from hospital. Final log-rank and Kaplan-Meier analyses are presented for remdesivir, and are appended for all four study drugs. Meta-analyses give weighted averages of the mortality findings in this and all other randomised trials of these drugs among hospital inpatients. Solidarity is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN83971151, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04315948. Between March 22, 2020, and Jan 29, 2021, 14 304 potentially eligible patients were recruited from 454 hospitals in 35 countries in all six WHO regions. After the exclusion of 83 (0·6%) patients with a refuted COVID-19 diagnosis or encrypted consent not entered into the database, Solidarity enrolled 14 221 patients, including 8275 randomly allocated (1:1) either to remdesivir (ten daily infusions, unless discharged earlier) or to its control (allocated no study drug although remdesivir was locally available). Compliance was high in both groups. Overall, 602 (14·5%) of 4146 patients assigned to remdesivir died versus 643 (15·6%) of 4129 assigned to control (mortality rate ratio [RR] 0·91 [95% CI 0·82–1·02], p=0·12). Of those already ventilated, 151 (42·1%) of 359 assigned to remdesivir died versus 134 (38·6%) of 347 assigned to control (RR 1·13 [0·89–1·42], p=0·32). Of those not ventilated but on oxygen, 14·6% assigned to remdesivir died versus 16·3% assigned to control (RR 0·87 [0·76–0·99], p=0·03). Of 1730 not on oxygen initially, 2·9% assigned to remdesivir died versus 3·8% assigned to control (RR 0·76 [0·46–1·28], p=0·30). Combining all those not ventilated initially, 11·9% assigned to remdesivir died versus 13·5% assigned to control (RR 0·86 [0·76–0·98], p=0·02) and 14·1% versus 15·7% progressed to ventilation (RR 0·88 [0·77–1·00], p=0·04). The non-prespecified composite outcome of death or progression to ventilation occurred in 19·6% assigned to remdesivir versus 22·5% assigned to control (RR 0·84 [0·75–0·93], p=0·001). Allocation to daily remdesivir infusions (vs open-label control) delayed discharge by about 1 day during the 10-day treatment period. A meta-analysis of mortality in all randomised trials of remdesivir versus no remdesivir yielded similar findings. Remdesivir has no significant effect on patients with COVID-19 who are already being ventilated. Among other hospitalised patients, it has a small effect against death or progression to ventilation (or both). WHO.

Background Alemtuzumab efficacy versus subcutaneous interferon-β-1a (SC IFNB-1a) was demonstrated over 2 years in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, with continued efficacy over 7 additional years. Alemtuzumab is included as a recommended treatment for patients with highly active disease (HAD) by the American Academy of Neurology Practice Guidelines, and the label indication in Europe was recently restricted to the treatment of HAD patients. There is currently no consensus definition for HAD, and alemtuzumab efficacy across various HAD definitions has not been explored previously. Objectives In this post hoc analysis, we assess the efficacy and safety of alemtuzumab in Comparison of Alemtuzumab and Rebif ® Efficacy in Multiple Sclerosis (CARE-MS) trial patients who met criteria for at least one of four separate definitions of HAD (one primary and three alternatives). Over 2 years, alemtuzumab-treated HAD patients were compared with SC IFNB-1a-treated HAD patients, with additional 7-year follow-up in patients from the alemtuzumab arm. Methods Patients in the CARE-MS studies received either alemtuzumab (baseline: 5 days; 12 months later: 3 days) or SC IFNB-1a (3 times weekly). Alemtuzumab-treated patients who enrolled in the extensions could receive additional courses ≥ 12 months apart. Four definitions of HAD were applied to assess alemtuzumab efficacy: the pre-specified primary definition (two or more relapses in the year prior to baseline and at least one gadolinium [Gd]-enhancing lesion at baseline) and three alternative definitions that focused on relapse, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or prior treatment response criteria. Efficacy outcomes were annualized relapse rate, change in Expanded Disability Status Scale score, 6-month confirmed disability worsening, 6-month confirmed disability improvement, MRI disease activity, and brain volume change. Adverse events were summarized for HAD patients meeting the primary definition. Results In the pooled CARE-MS population, 208 alemtuzumab-treated patients met the primary HAD definition. Annualized relapse rate was 0.27 in years 0–2 and 0.16 in years 3–9. Over 9 years, 62% of patients were free of 6-month confirmed disability worsening, 50% had 6-month confirmed disability improvement, and median cumulative change in brain volume was − 2.15%. During year 9, 62% had no evidence of disease activity, and 69% were free of MRI disease activity. Similar efficacy outcomes were observed using an alternative relapse-driven HAD definition. For patients meeting alternative HAD definitions focused on either higher MRI lesion counts or disease activity while on prior therapy, reduced efficacy for some endpoints was seen. Safety was consistent with the overall CARE-MS population through year 9. Conclusions Over 9 years, alemtuzumab efficacy was maintained in CARE-MS HAD patients based on four HAD definitions. These results support intervention with alemtuzumab in patients with early indicators of HAD, including frequent relapse without high MRI activity. No safety signals were observed over 9 years that were unique to the HAD populations. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers NCT00530348; NCT00548405; NCT00930553; NCT02255656.

Mortality remains high after emergency open surgery for a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA). The aim of the present study was to assess, if intravenous (IV) Interferon (IFN) beta-1a improve survival after surgery by up-regulating Cluster of differentiation (CD73). This is a multi-center phase II double-blind, 2:1 randomized, parallel group comparison of the efficacy and safety of IV IFN beta-1a vs. placebo for the prevention of death after open surgery for an infra-renal RAAA. All study patients presented a confirmed infra-renal RAAA, survived the primary emergency surgery and were treated with IFN beta-1a (10 μg) or matching placebo for 6 days after surgery. Major exclusion criteria included fatal hemorrhagic shock, chronic renal replacement therapy, diagnosed liver cirrhosis, severe congestive heart failure, advanced malignant disease, primary attempt of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), and per-operative suprarenal clamping over 30 min. Main outcome measure was all-cause mortality at day 30 (D30) from initial emergency aortic reconstruction. The study was pre-maturely stopped due to a reported drug-drug interaction and was left under-powered. Out of 40 randomized patients 38 were included in the outcome analyses (27 IFN beta-1a and 11 placebo). There was no statistically significant difference between treatment groups at baseline except more open-abdomen and intestinal ischemia was present in the IFN beta-1a arm. D30 all-cause mortality was 22.2% (6/27) in the IFN beta-1a arm and 18.2% (2/11) in the placebo arm (OR 1.30; 95% CI 0.21–8.19). The most common adverse event relating to the IFN beta-1a was pyrexia (20.7% in the IFN beta-1a arm vs. 9.1% in the placebo arm). Patients with high level of serum CD73 associated with survival (P = 0.001) whereas the use of glucocorticoids and the presence of IFN beta-1a neutralizing antibodies associated with a poor CD73 response and survival. The initial aim of the trial, if postoperative INF beta-1a treatment results on better RAAA survival, could not be demonstrated. Nonetheless the anticipated target mechanism up-regulation of CD73 was associated with 100% survival. According to present results the INF beta-1a induced up-regulation of serum CD73 was blocked with both use of glucocorticoids and serum IFN beta-1a neutralizing antibodies. The study was pre-maturely stopped due to interim analysis after a study concerning the use if IV IFN beta-1a in ARDS suggested that the concomitant use of glucocorticoids and IFN beta-1a block the CD73 induction. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03119701. Registered 19/04/2017 (retrospectively registered).

Ozanimod, a sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulator, selectively binds to receptor subtypes 1 and 5 with high affinity. The RADIANCE phase 2 study showed that ozanimod had better efficacy than placebo on MRI measures, with a favourable safety profile, in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis. The SUNBEAM study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of ozanimod versus intramuscular interferon beta-1a in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis. SUNBEAM was a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled phase 3 trial done at 152 academic medical centres and clinical practices in 20 countries. We enrolled participants aged 18–55 years with relapsing multiple sclerosis, baseline expanded disability status scale (EDSS) score of 0·0–5·0, and either at least one relapse within the 12 months before screening or at least one relapse within 24 months plus at least one gadolinium-enhancing lesion within 12 months before screening. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1 by a blocked algorithm stratified by country and baseline EDSS score to at least 12 months treatment of either once-daily oral ozanimod 1·0 mg or 0·5 mg or weekly intramuscular interferon beta-1a 30 μg. Participants, investigators, and study staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was annualised relapse rate (ARR) during the treatment period and was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all participants according to the highest dose of ozanimod received. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02294058 and EudraCT, number 2014–002320–27. Between Dec 18, 2014, and Nov 12, 2015, 1346 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to ozanimod 1·0 mg (n=447), ozanimod 0·5 mg (n=451), or interferon beta-1a (n=448). 91 (6·8%) participants discontinued the study drug (29 in the ozanimod 1·0 mg group; 26 in the ozanimod 0·5 mg group; and 36 in the interferon beta-1a group). Adjusted ARRs were 0·35 (0·28–0·44) for interferon beta-1a, 0·18 (95% CI 0·14–0·24) for ozanimod 1·0 mg (rate ratio [RR] of 0·52 [0·41–0·66] vs interferon beta-1a; p<0·0001), and 0·24 (0·19–0·31) for ozanimod 0·5 mg (RR 0·69 [0·55–0·86] vs interferon beta-1a; p=0·0013). Few ozanimod-treated participants discontinued treatment because of adverse events (13 [2·9%] who received ozanimod 1·0 mg; seven [1·5%] who received ozanimod 0·5 mg; and 16 [3·6%] who received interferon beta-1a). No first-dose, clinically significant bradycardia or second-degree or third-degree atrioventricular block was reported. The incidence of serious adverse events was low and similar across treatment groups (13 [2·9%] participants who received ozanimod 1·0 mg; 16 [3·5%] who received ozanimod 0·5 mg; and 11 [2·5%] who received interferon beta-1a). No serious opportunistic infections occurred in ozanimod-treated participants. In participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis treated for at least 12 months, ozanimod was well tolerated and demonstrated a significantly lower relapse rate than interferon beta-1a. These findings provide support for ozanimod as an oral therapy for individuals with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Celgene International II.

Ozanimod is a sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulator, which selectively binds to sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor subtypes 1 and 5 with high affinity. In the RADIANCE phase 2 study in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis, ozanimod was associated with better efficacy than placebo on MRI measures and was well tolerated. The RADIANCE phase 3 study aimed to confirm the safety and efficacy of ozanimod versus interferon beta-1a in individuals with relapsing multiple sclerosis. We did a 24-month, multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy phase 3 trial in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis at 147 medical centres and clinical practices in 21 countries. Participants were aged 18–55 years, had multiple sclerosis according to 2010 McDonald criteria, a relapsing clinical course, brain MRI lesions consistent with multiple sclerosis, an expanded disability status scale score of 0·0–5·0, and either at least one relapse within 12 months before screening or at least one relapse within 24 months before screening plus at least one gadolinium-enhancing lesion within the 12 months before randomisation. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via an interactive voice response system to daily oral ozanimod 1·0 mg or 0·5 mg or weekly intramuscular interferon beta-1a 30 μg. Participants, investigators, and study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was annualised relapse rate (ARR) over 24 months. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population of all participants who received study drug and safety was assessed in all randomly assigned participants who received study drug, grouped by highest dose of ozanimod received. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02047734, and EudraCT, 2012-002714-40. Between Dec 27, 2013, and March 31, 2015, we screened 1695 participants, of which 375 did not meet inclusion criteria. 1320 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to a group, of whom 1313 received study drug (433 assigned to ozanimod 1·0 mg, 439 assigned to ozanimod 0·5 mg, and 441 assigned to interferon beta-1a) and 1138 (86·7%) completed 24 months of treatment. Adjusted ARRs were 0·17 (95% CI 0·14–0·21) with ozanimod 1·0 mg, 0·22 (0·18–0·26) with ozanimod 0·5 mg, and 0·28 (0·23–0·32) with interferon beta-1a, with rate ratios versus interferon beta-1a of 0·62 (95% CI 0·51–0·77; p<0·0001) for ozanimod 1·0 mg and 0·79 (0·65 to 0·96; p=0·0167) for ozanimod 0·5 mg. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was higher in the interferon beta-1a group (365 [83·0%] of 440 participants) than in the ozanimod 1·0 mg group (324 [74·7%] of 434) or the ozanimod 0·5 mg group (326 [74·3%] of 439). More participants in the interferon beta-1a group had treatment-emergent adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation than in the ozanimod groups. Incidences of infections and serious treatment-emergent adverse events were similar across treatment groups. No cases of ozanimod-related symptomatic reduction in heart rate and no second-degree or third-degree cases of atrioventricular block were reported. In this 24-month phase 3 study in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis, ozanimod was well tolerated and associated with a significantly lower rate of clinical relapses than intramuscular interferon beta-1a. These findings show the potential of ozanimod as an effective oral therapy for individuals with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Celgene International II.

Type 1 Interferons (IFNs) have been associated with positive effects on Coronaviruses. Previous studies point towards the superior potency of IFNβ compared to IFNα against viral infections. We conducted a three-armed, individually-randomized, open-label, controlled trial of IFNβ1a and IFNβ1b, comparing them against each other and a control group. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to IFNβ1a (subcutaneous injections of 12,000 IU on days 1, 3, 6), IFNβ1b (subcutaneous injections of 8,000,000 IU on days 1, 3, 6), or the control group. All three arms orally received Lopinavir/Ritonavir (400 mg/100 mg twice a day for ten days) and a single dose of Hydroxychloroquine 400 mg on the first day. Our utilized primary outcome measure was Time To Clinical Improvement (TTCI) defined as the time from enrollment to discharge or a decline of two steps on the clinical seven-step ordinal scale, whichsoever came first. A total of 60 severely ill patients with positive RT-PCR and Chest CT scans underwent randomization (20 patients to each arm). In the Intention-To-Treat population, IFNβ1a was associated with a significant difference against the control group, in the TTCI; (HR; 2.36, 95% CI 1.10–5.17, P-value = 0.031) while the IFNβ1b indicated no significant difference compared with the control; HR; 1.42, (95% CI 0.63–3.16, P-value = 0.395). The median TTCI for both of the intervention groups was five days vs. seven days for the control group. The mortality was numerically lower in both of the intervention groups (20% in the IFNβ1a group and 30% in the IFNβ1b group vs. 45% in the control group). There were no significant differences between the three arms regarding the adverse events. In patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, as compared with the base therapeutic regiment, the benefit of a significant reduction in TTCI was observed in the IFNβ1a arm. This finding needs further confirmation in larger studies. Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04343768. (Submitted: 08/04/2020; First Online: 13/04/2020) (Registration Number: NCT04343768).

ObjectiveEarly treatment following a first clinical demyelinating event (FCDE) delays further disease activity in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). This study determined the effects of early versus delayed treatment (DT) with subcutaneous interferon (sc IFN) β-1a 44 μg in patients with an FCDE up to 60 months postrandomisation.MethodsPatients who completed the 24-month double-blind REFLEX (REbif FLEXible dosing in early MS) study entered an extension (REFLEXION, REbif FLEXible dosing in early MS extensION): patients initially randomised to sc IFN β-1a and not reaching clinically definite MS (clinically definite MS, CDMS (second attack or sustained Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score increase)) continued original treatment (three times weekly (tiw) or once weekly (qw)); placebo patients switched to tiw (DT); patients with CDMS switched to tiw. Clinical, MRI and adverse event data up to month 60 are reported.Results402/517 (77.8%) REFLEX patients entered REFLEXION (DT, n=133; tiw, n=127; qw, n=142). At month 60, cumulative probability of CDMS was: DT 44.6%; qw 40.7% (nominal p=0.084 vs DT); tiw 39.2% (nominal p=0.032 vs DT). Cumulative probability of McDonald MS conversion (CDMS or new MRI activity) at month 60 was also reduced for tiw versus DT (nominal p<0.001). At month 60, mean cumulative numbers of new T2, gadolinium-enhancing and T1 hypointense lesions were lower with sc IFN β-1a qw (nominal p<0.05) and tiw versus DT (nominal p<0.001); T2 and T1 hypointense lesion volume change was lower for sc IFN β-1a tiw versus DT (nominal p<0.01). Treatment was well tolerated; fewer patients receiving tiw versus qw were positive for neutralising or binding antibodies.ConclusionsOver 5 years in patients presenting with an FCDE, early sc IFN β-1a tiw administration versus DT prolonged time to CDMS and McDonald MS, and reduced overall MRI activity.Trial registration numberNCT00813709; Results.

ObjectiveThe 12-month (M), phase 3, double-blind, randomised TRANSFORMS study demonstrated significant benefits of fingolimod 0.5 or 1.25 mg over interferon β-1a (IFNβ-1a) in patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. We report the results of long-term (up to 4.5 years) extension of TRANSFORMS.MethodsPatients randomised to fingolimod (0.5/1.25 mg) in the core phase continued the same dose (continuous-fingolimod) in the extension, whereas those on IFNβ-1a were re-randomised (1:1) to fingolimod (IFN-switch; IFN: 0.5/1.25 mg). Outcomes included annualised relapse rate (ARR), confirmed disability progression and MRI measures. Results are presented here for the continuous-fingolimod 0.5 mg and pooled IFN-switch groups.ResultsOf the 1027 patients who entered the extension, 772 (75.2%) completed the study. From baseline to the end of the study (EOS), ARR in patients on continuous-fingolimod 0.5 mg was significantly lower than in the IFN-switch group (M0–EOS: 0.17 vs 0.27). After switching to fingolimod (M0–12 vs M13–EOS), patients initially treated with IFN had a 50% reduction in ARR (0.40 vs 0.20), reduced MRI activity and a lower rate of brain volume loss. In a post hoc analysis, the proportion of IFN-switch patients with no evidence of disease activity increased by approximately 50% in the first year after switching to fingolimod treatment (44.3% to 66.0%). The safety profile was consistent with that observed in the core phase.ConclusionsThese results support a continued effect of long-term fingolimod therapy in maintaining a low rate of disease activity and sustained improved efficacy after switching from IFNβ-1a to fingolimod.Clinical trial registration NoNCT00340834.