BACKGROUND: A broad range of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) is available. However, the efficacy and safety of traditional DMTs compared with the recently developed DMTs remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: Therefore, we have synthesised available evidence of clinical outcomes for DMTs in adults with RRMS. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus and a manual search were performed. Bayesian network meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials assessing DMTs as monotherapies were conducted. SUCRA and GRADE were used to rank therapies and to assess quality of general evidence, respectively. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies were included in the meta-analyses. The most effective therapies for the outcome of annualised relapse rate were alemtuzumab (96% probability), natalizumab (96%) and ocrelizumab (85%), compared with all other therapies (hazard ratio versus placebo, 0.31, 0.31 and 0.37, respectively; p < 0.05 for all comparisons) (high-quality evidence). However, no significant differences among these three therapies were found. Discontinuation due to adverse events revealed similarity across all therapies, except for alemtuzumab, which showed less discontinuation when compared with interferon-1a intramuscular (relative risk 0.37; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: High-quality evidence shows that alemtuzumab, natalizumab and ocrelizumab present the highest efficacy among DMTs, and other meta-analyses are required regarding adverse events frequency, to better understand the safety of therapies. Based on efficacy profile, guidelines should consider a three-category classification (i.e. high, intermediate and low efficacy).
BACKGROUND: A broad range of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) is available. However, the efficacy and safety of traditional DMTs compared with the recently developed DMTs remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: Therefore, we have synthesised available evidence of clinical outcomes for DMTs in adults with RRMS. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus and a manual search were performed. Bayesian network meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials assessing DMTs as monotherapies were conducted. SUCRA and GRADE were used to rank therapies and to assess quality of general evidence, respectively. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies were included in the meta-analyses. The most effective therapies for the outcome of annualised relapse rate were alemtuzumab (96% probability), natalizumab (96%) and ocrelizumab (85%), compared with all other therapies (hazard ratio versus placebo, 0.31, 0.31 and 0.37, respectively; p < 0.05 for all comparisons) (high-quality evidence). However, no significant differences among these three therapies were found. Discontinuation due to adverse events revealed similarity across all therapies, except for alemtuzumab, which showed less discontinuation when compared with interferon-1a intramuscular (relative risk 0.37; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: High-quality evidence shows that alemtuzumab, natalizumab and ocrelizumab present the highest efficacy among DMTs, and other meta-analyses are required regarding adverse events frequency, to better understand the safety of therapies. Based on efficacy profile, guidelines should consider a three-category classification (i.e. high, intermediate and low efficacy).
Authors: David Atkins; Dana Best; Peter A Briss; Martin Eccles; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Signe Flottorp; Gordon H Guyatt; Robin T Harbour; Margaret C Haugh; David Henry; Suzanne Hill; Roman Jaeschke; Gillian Leng; Alessandro Liberati; Nicola Magrini; James Mason; Philippa Middleton; Jacek Mrukowicz; Dianne O'Connell; Andrew D Oxman; Bob Phillips; Holger J Schünemann; Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer; Helena Varonen; Gunn E Vist; John W Williams; Stephanie Zaza Journal: BMJ Date: 2004-06-19
Authors: Neil Scolding; David Barnes; Sarah Cader; Jeremy Chataway; Abhijit Chaudhuri; Alasdair Coles; Gavin Giovannoni; David Miller; Waqar Rashid; Klaus Schmierer; Abdullah Shehu; Eli Silber; Carolyn Young; John Zajicek Journal: Pract Neurol Date: 2015-06-22
Authors: Brian Hutton; Georgia Salanti; Deborah M Caldwell; Anna Chaimani; Christopher H Schmid; Chris Cameron; John P A Ioannidis; Sharon Straus; Kristian Thorlund; Jeroen P Jansen; Cynthia Mulrow; Ferrán Catalá-López; Peter C Gøtzsche; Kay Dickersin; Isabelle Boutron; Douglas G Altman; David Moher Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Alasdair J Coles; Jeffrey A Cohen; Edward J Fox; Gavin Giovannoni; Hans-Peter Hartung; Eva Havrdova; Sven Schippling; Krzysztof W Selmaj; Anthony Traboulsee; D Alastair S Compston; David H Margolin; Karthinathan Thangavelu; Madalina C Chirieac; Darlene Jody; Panos Xenopoulos; Richard J Hogan; Michael A Panzara; Douglas L Arnold Journal: Neurology Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Azza Ismail; Basil Sharrack; Riccardo Saccardi; John J Moore; John A Snowden Journal: Curr Opin Support Palliat Care Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 2.302
Authors: Thomas F Scott; Ray Su; Kuangnan Xiong; Arman Altincatal; Carmen Castrillo-Viguera; Maria L Naylor Journal: Ther Adv Neurol Disord Date: 2021-01-12 Impact factor: 6.570
Authors: Rosa C Lucchetta; Letícia P Leonart; Marcus V M Gonçalves; Jefferson Becker; Roberto Pontarolo; Fernando Fernandez-Llimós; Astrid Wiens Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-06-16 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Trudy L Campbell; Béatrice Jenny Lefaux; Lori Lee Mayer; Marie Namey; Gisela Riemer; Miguel A Robles-Sanchez; Sarah White; Michael Edwards; Charles Minor Journal: J Neurosci Nurs Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 1.627