Showing posts with label interferon beta-1a. Show all posts
Showing posts with label interferon beta-1a. Show all posts

Monday, January 26, 2009

UPDATE 1-Biogen moves long-acting Avonex to final trial-CEO



By Deena Beasley

LOS ANGELES, Jan 7 (Reuters) - Biogen Idec Inc (BIIB.O: Quote, Profile, Research) has moved a long-acting version of its multiple sclerosis drug, Avonex, directly into trials designed to meet requirements for regulatory approval, the company's chief executive said on Wednesday.

CEO Jim Mullen said during an investor conference held in New York that the company has completed Phase 1 trials and will study dosing the drug once every two weeks as well as once monthly.

"I think we've got a good chance of similar efficacy as interferons," he said.

Patients in the trials will be treated for one year with the injectable drug and full results will likely be available in two years, Mullen added.

Avonex, with sales of $573 million in the third quarter of 2008, is the leading drug for multiple sclerosis, an autoimmune disease in which the body mistakenly attacks the fatty myelin coating surrounding nerve cells.

Biogen, along with marketing partner Elan Corp Plc (ELN.I: Quote, Profile, Research), also sells MS drug Tysabri, which was taken off the market after its 2004 introduction when it was linked to a potentially fatal brain infection, but reintroduced beginning in 2006 because there were so few good options for patients with MS.

Mullen said investors continue to underestimate the newer drug's sales potential: "We have a much more bullish view on Tysabri than the Street does."

"We've got a 40 share of the overall MS market, which could easily go to 50," the CEO said.

He said other discrepancies between Biogen's outlook and that of Wall Street include the company's "more bullish view on the sustainability of Avonex," growth potential for the franchise surrounding non-Hodgkin's lymphoma drug Rituxan, and additional opportunities for trimming costs.

Mullen said Biogen will no longer report new cases of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, the brain infection associated with Tysabri, through filings with securities regulators, but will instead issue weekly updates on its Web site. (Reporting by Deena Beasley; Editing by Andre Grenon and Matthew Lewis)

© Thomson Reuters 2008. All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters and its logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of the Thomson Reuters group of companies around the world.

Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.

Friday, December 12, 2008

First Phase III results for FTY720, a novel oral therapy for MS, show superior efficacy compared to interferon beta-1a





* FTY720 significantly reduced annualized relapse rates by 52% (0.5 mg dose) and 38% (1.25 mg) vs. interferon beta-1a in one-year TRANSFORMS study[1]

* FTY720 generally well-tolerated and safety profile in line with previous experience[1]

* Regulatory submissions for FTY720 in US and EU on track for end of 2009; FREEDOMS and FREEDOMS II placebo-controlled Phase III studies continuing

* Multiple sclerosis, a devastating disease causing progressive disability, affects up to 2.5 million people worldwide including many young adults[2]

Basel, December 12, 2008 - Initial results from the one-year Phase III TRANSFORMS study show the investigational oral compound FTY720 (fingolimod) has superior efficacy to a current standard of care for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS). Patients on oral FTY720 experienced significantly fewer relapses than those treated with the injectable medicine interferon beta-1a (Avonex®*)[1].

The study, the first one-year head-to-head Phase III trial against a standard of care in MS, met its primary endpoint for both doses of FTY720.

The annualized relapse rate at one year for patients given FTY720 0.5 mg was 0.16, representing a 52% reduction compared to a relapse rate of 0.33 for interferon beta-1a (p<0.001). The FTY720 1.25 mg dose also showed a significant reduction in relapses with a rate of 0.20 representing a 38% reduction against interferon beta-1a (p<0.001). No statistically significant difference was seen between the two FTY720 doses[1].
Comprehensive analyses of the TRANSFORMS study data are ongoing, and detailed results are planned to be presented at a leading scientific congress in 2009. Regulatory submissions remain on track to be completed in the US and EU at the end of 2009.
"We are encouraged by the early results from TRANSFORMS, which represent a major step towards delivering an effective oral treatment for people with relapsing-remitting MS," said Trevor Mundel, MD, Global Head of Development at Novartis Pharma AG. "These positive results reinforce the potential for FTY720 to provide a significant advance in the future treatment of this devastating disease."

MS is a chronic autoimmune neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system associated with irreversible progression of disability[3]. As many as 2.5 million people worldwide are affected by the condition[2] that typically begins in early adulthood between the ages of 20 and 40 years when patients are in the prime of life[4].

TRANSFORMS (TRial Assessing injectable interferoN vS FTY720 Oral in RrMS) is the first of three studies to report results in one of the largest Phase III clinical programs ever conducted in MS, involving more than 3,400 patients around the world.
As a head-to-head trial against interferon beta-1a, TRANSFORMS was designed to assess the efficacy of FTY720 compared to an established disease-modifying therapy in reducing relapse rates in patients with relapsing-remitting MS, the most common form of the disease. Two other studies - FREEDOMS and FREEDOMS II - are two-year placebo-controlled Phase III studies to assess the impact of FTY720 in reducing the frequency of relapses and slowing the progression of disability, and to further characterize the benefit-risk profile. Data from these studies to support regulatory submissions are expected in 2009.

TRANSFORMS was a one-year worldwide double-blind, double-dummy study that enrolled 1,292 patients. The study had three arms: oral FTY720 0.5 mg and 1.25 mg once-daily, and the active comparator interferon beta-1a given once-weekly by intra-muscular injection. The patient population in TRANSFORMS was consistent with the demographics and disease state seen in Phase III clinical trials for other disease-modifying treatments for relapsing-remitting MS[5].

The safety profile of FTY720 seen in TRANSFORMS was in line with previous clinical experience. The compound was generally well-tolerated with 87% of FTY720-treated patients completing the study on treatment. The proportion of patients discontinuing therapy was 10% in the FTY720 0.5 mg group, 15% in the FTY720 1.25 mg group, and 12% in the interferon beta-1a group[1].

The most commonly reported adverse events, seen in more than 10% of patients in all three study arms, were headache, nasopharyngitis and fatigue. Influenza-like symptoms were reported in 37% of patients treated with interferon beta-1a and in 4% of patients treated with FTY720[1].

Adverse effects seen in FTY720-treated patients included transient reductions in heart rate at the start of treatment, minor increases in blood pressure, and elevations in liver enzymes (also seen with interferon beta-1a). Macular edema (swelling of the center of the retina) was detected in less than 1% of FTY720-treated patients[1]. Seven cases of localized skin cancer were diagnosed in FTY720-treated patients (four basal cell carcinoma and three melanoma), while one case of squamous cell carcinoma was seen in the interferon beta-1a group. All of these localized skin lesions were successfully removed[1].

As previously reported, two fatal herpes infections occurred in patients treated with FTY720 1.25 mg. Both cases involved confounding factors impacting the outcome, but a role for FTY720 could not be excluded given its immunosuppressive effect.

In general, the safety profile of the FTY720 0.5 mg dose appeared to be better than that of the 1.25 mg dose, including lower rates of infections and bradycardia. Further analyses of the TRANSFORMS data and results from the ongoing Phase III studies will help to provide a more comprehensive assessment of FTY720's benefit-risk profile.

Disclaimer
The foregoing release contains forward-looking statements that can be identified by terminology such as "on track," "planned," "encouraged," "potential," "to assess," "to further characterize," "expected," "appeared to be," "will," or similar expressions, or by express or implied discussions regarding potential regulatory submissions or marketing approvals for FTY720 or regarding potential future revenues from FTY720. You should not place undue reliance on these statements. Such forward-looking statements reflect the current views of management regarding future events, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results with FTY720 to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such statements. There can be no guarantee that FTY720 will be submitted for approval in any market by the end of 2009 or at any time. Nor can there be any guarantee that FTY720 will ever be approved for sale in any market. Neither can there be any guarantee that FTY720 will achieve any particular levels of revenue in the future. In particular, management's expectations regarding FTY720 could be affected by, among other things, unexpected clinical trial results, including unexpected new clinical data (including the upcoming results of the FREEDOMS and FREEDOMS II trials) and unexpected additional analysis of existing clinical data (including the results of the ongoing additional analyses of the TRANSFORMS clinical data); unexpected regulatory actions or delays or government regulation generally; competition in general; the company's ability to obtain or maintain patent or other proprietary intellectual property protection; government, industry and general public pricing pressures; the impact that the foregoing factors could have on the values attributed to the Novartis Group's assets and liabilities as recorded in the Group's consolidated balance sheet, and other risks and factors referred to in Novartis AG's current Form 20-F on file with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those anticipated, believed, estimated or expected. Novartis is providing the information in this press release as of this date and does not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statements contained in this press release as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

About Novartis
Novartis AG provides healthcare solutions that address the evolving needs of patients and societies. Focused solely on healthcare, Novartis offers a diversified portfolio to best meet these needs: innovative medicines, cost-saving generic pharmaceuticals, preventive vaccines, diagnostic tools and consumer health products. Novartis is the only company with leading positions in these areas. In 2007, the Group's continuing operations (excluding divestments in 2007) achieved net sales of USD 38.1 billion and net income of USD 6.5 billion. Approximately USD 6.4 billion was invested in R&D activities throughout the Group. Headquartered in Basel, Switzerland, Novartis Group companies employ approximately 97,000 full-time associates and operate in over 140 countries around the world. For more information, please visit http://www.novartis.com.

References

[1.] Novartis. Data on file.
[2.] World Health Organization. Neurology atlas, 2004. http://www.who.int/mental_health/neurology/neurogy_atlas_review_references.pdf (Accessed 30 November 2008).
[3.] Confavreux C, Vukusic S. Accumulation of irreversible disability in multiple sclerosis: from epidemiology to treatment. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2006;108:327-32.
[4.] Confavreux C, Aimard G, Devic M. Course and prognosis of multiple sclerosis assessed by the computerized data processing of 349 patients. Brain 1980;103:281-300.
[5.] Cohen J, et al. Oral fingolimod (FTY720) versus interferon beta-1a in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: baseline patient demographics and disease characteristics from a Phase III trial (TRANSFORMS). Abstract at WCTRIMS, April 2008.
[*] Avonex® is a registered trademark of Biogen Idec.

# # #

Novartis Media Relations
Central media line: +41 61 324 2200

Eric Althoff
Novartis Global Media Relations
+41 61 324 7999 (direct)
+41 79 593 4202 (mobile)
eric.althoff@novartis.com

John Taylor
Novartis Pharma Communications
+41 61 324 6715 (direct)
+41 79 593 4279 (mobile)
john.taylor@novartis.com
e-mail: media.relations@novartis.com
Novartis Investor Relations
Central phone:

+41 61 324 7944


Ruth Metzler-Arnold

+41 61 324 9980

North America:

Pierre-Michel Bringer

+41 61 324 1065

Richard Jarvis

+1 212 830 2433
John Gilardi

+41 61 324 3018

Jill Pozarek

+1 212 830 2445
Thomas Hungerbuehler

+41 61 324 8425

Edwin Valeriano

+1 212 830 2456
Isabella Zinck

+41 61 324 7188



e-mail: investor.relations@novartis.com

e-mail: investor.relations@novartis.com

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Study Results: Multiple Sclerosis Patients Have Significant and Sustained Reduction in Disability and Risk Of Relapse On Alemtuzumab Versus Approved T





Date: October 22, 2008

Final Phase 2 Data Published in New England Journal of Medicine
International Phase 3 Alemtuzumab Studies Enrolling

Genzyme Corporation (Nasdaq: GENZ) and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. today announced study results showing that patients with early relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) taking once-yearly cycles of alemtuzumab reduced their risk of relapse by 74 percent and the risk of sustained accumulation of disability by 71 percent compared to patients treated with the active comparator Rebif® (high-dose interferon beta-1a). Importantly, the mean disability of patients on alemtuzumab improved from baseline, whereas the mean disability of those on Rebif worsened. The treatment benefits of alemtuzumab were sustained for at least three years, even though the majority of alemtuzumab-treated patients were last dosed two years earlier. These results come from the final three-year analysis of a Phase 2 clinical study (CAMMS223) reported in the Oct. 23 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. The study involved 334 patients who had not previously been treated for their disease.

“The alemtuzumab trial data continue to suggest a potentially new and exciting treatment for patients with early, active multiple sclerosis,” says Alastair Compston, Professor of Neurology and the head of the Department of Clinical Neurosciences at the University of Cambridge, United Kingdom, and the study’s principal investigator. “This randomized study confirms findings from prior studies demonstrating that treatment with alemtuzumab can have a profound and durable impact on patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, including restoring some lost function in many patients.”

“Symptoms of multiple sclerosis result from an immune system attack on the protective insulation surrounding nerve fibers of the central nervous system. We believe alemtuzumab shuts down this immune system attack, treating the disease at its root cause,” says Alasdair Coles, Senior Lecturer, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge and a lead investigator in the study.

Common non-serious adverse events in the trial included infusion-associated reactions in the alemtuzumab patients and flu-like symptoms in patients using Rebif. Alemtuzumab-treated patients were more likely than Rebif patients to experience infections, which were predominantly mild to moderate in severity, as well as autoimmune thyroid disease. Three percent of alemtuzumab-treated patients developed the potentially serious autoimmune adverse event immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), a disorder characterized by a low platelet count and corresponding increased risk of uncontrolled bleeding. Additional study and trial safety information is below.

“The trial was larger and follow-up was longer than the typical Phase 2 trial in multiple sclerosis. It is important to note that we compared the investigative drug directly against a widely used therapy rather than against placebo. The trial did not show an increased risk of life-threatening or opportunistic infections, but a proportion of alemtuzumab patients experienced new autoimmune disease. We have been able to create a robust patient monitoring program that allows us to proceed into our two international Phase 3 trials with greater assurance on safety associated with patient management,” says Dr. Richard Moscicki, chief medical officer for Genzyme.

According to the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, approximately 400,000 Americans acknowledge having MS, and every week about 200 people are diagnosed. Worldwide, multiple sclerosis may affect 2.5 million individuals. The disease causes a wide range of symptoms including difficulty with walking, numbness, fatigue and impairment of vision, and progresses to permanent, severe disability in the majority of patients. Relapsing-remitting MS is the most common presenting form of the disease.

“We are pleased to see potential new treatment options move positively through the MS pipeline,” says Dr. John Richert, executive vice president for research and clinical programs at the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, “and as alemtuzumab is moved into Phase 3 studies, we hope that individuals with MS will consult with their physicians to assess whether they are appropriate patients and if so will consider the pros and cons of participating in these important clinical trials.”

Additional New Top-Line Data

New and previously unreported top-line data from secondary analyses of the CAMMS223 Phase 2 clinical trial, presented last month at the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (WCTRIMS), revealed that the proportion of clinically disease-free patients was significantly higher in the alemtuzumab group than in the Rebif group at year one (86 percent vs. 63 percent), year two (81 percent vs. 48 percent), and year three (71 percent vs. 39 percent, p-values <0.0001). “Clinically disease-free” was defined as the absence of both relapses and sustained accumulation of disability during the time-period assessed.

The top-line data from WCTRIMS also showed that the proportion of patients free of sustained accumulation of disability over a six-month period was also significantly greater in the alemtuzumab group than in the Rebif group at year one (97.2 percent vs. 87.0 percent), year two (94.3 percent vs. 82.4 percent), and year three (91.0 percent vs. 73.8 percent, p-values <0.005).

Further, the proportion of relapse-free patients over time was significantly greater in the alemtuzumab group than in the Rebif group at year one (91.1 percent vs. 69.3 percent), year two (88.2 percent vs. 58.5), and year three (80.2 percent vs. 51.6 percent, p-values <0.0001).

Phase 2 Extension Trial

Genzyme with Bayer support has launched an extension of the CAMMS223 trial to examine safety and efficacy outcomes beyond three years, and to compare two distinct retreatment strategies. The results should provide an understanding of the long-term effects of prior alemtuzumab treatment as well as the safety and sustained efficacy of additional alemtuzumab retreatment delivered in fixed annual cycles or as needed for resumed MS disease activity. In the fixed arm, patients will receive two annual cycles of alemtuzumab (12 mg/day for three consecutive days/cycle). In the as-needed arm, retreatment is deferred until a patient relapses or develops two or more new/active brain lesions on MRI.

Phase 3 Trials

Genzyme with Bayer support is sponsoring two Phase 3 trials in which patients are now enrolling. The CARE-MS I Phase 3 study (Comparison of Alemtuzumab and Rebif Efficacy in Multiple Sclerosis), is a randomized, rater-blinded study that will again compare alemtuzumab to Rebif in patients with relapsing-remitting MS who have not been previously treated for their disease. The CARE-MS II trial is studying patients who have continued to relapse while using approved MS therapies.

Physicians or patients in the United States seeking additional information about the CARE-MS Phase 3 trials should go to www.care-ms.com or call Genzyme Medical Information at 800-745-4447.

About Study CAMMS223

In the Phase 2 trial, 334 patients with active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis were enrolled at 49 medical centers in Europe and the United States. Patients in the trial were randomized to treatment with alemtuzumab at one of two dose levels (12 or 24 mg per day intravenously) for five days during the first cycle and three days 12 months later during the second cycle of therapy, or Rebif (44 mcg administered by subcutaneous injection three times per week, as indicated in its product label). A third cycle of alemtuzumab therapy was received by 46 patients at month 24.

The trial compared the efficacy of alemtuzumab with Rebif using two primary outcome measures: the Relapse Rate and the time to Sustained Accumulation of Disability as evidenced by an increase in the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score for six consecutive months. Efficacy assessments were made by independent neurologists blinded to patients’ treatment assignments. The EDSS is a 10-point scale in which every 0.5-point step marks a notable deterioration in neurological capabilities.

The mean disability score of patients after alemtuzumab actually improved (by 0.39 EDSS points) indicating a recovery of neurologic functions. The median disability score improved to a similar extent after alemtuzumab. In contrast, mean disability worsened in the Rebif group (by 0.38 EDSS points) resulting in a difference of nearly a full EDSS point (0.77 difference, p<0.0001) at three years.

Safety Data

A total of six alemtuzumab-treated patients, and one Rebif-treated patient, in this study developed a serious adverse event, immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). ITP is a disorder characterized by a low platelet count and corresponding increased risk of uncontrolled bleeding. The Rebif patient with ITP was asymptomatic but ITP persisted at the time of study completion. In the previously reported alemtuzumab-related fatal case, symptoms of ITP were experienced but were not recognized in time, thus delaying medical attention. Of the remaining alemtuzumab cases, four patients were diagnosed promptly, responded well to medical treatment, and have been stable without a need for ongoing treatment. The other alemtuzumab-treated case experienced spontaneous remission of ITP. A patient monitoring program was instituted in the trial, and there have been no new cases of ITP reported in CAMMS223 in approximately two years.

Common non-serious adverse events in the trial included infusion-associated reactions in the alemtuzumab patients and flu-like symptoms in patients using Rebif. Alemtuzumab-treated patients were more likely than Rebif patients to experience infections, particularly of the upper respiratory tract; infections were predominantly mild to moderate in severity and there were no life-threatening or fatal infections. Though alemtuzumab transiently lowers white blood cell counts, the trial did not show an increased risk of opportunistic infections. Serious infections were infrequent in the alemtuzumab-treated patients. Approximately 23 percent of alemtuzumab-treated patients developed autoimmune thyroid-related adverse events, including Graves’ disease, and were managed using conventional therapies.

Alemtuzumab is an investigational drug for the treatment of MS and must not be used in MS patients outside of a formal, regulated clinical trial setting in which appropriate patient monitoring measures are in place.

About Alemtuzumab

Alemtuzumab is licensed in the United States as a single agent for the treatment of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL), and outside of the U.S. for the treatment of B-CLL in patients who have been treated with alkylating agents and for whom fludarabine combination therapy is not appropriate. The product was launched in its oncology indication in 2001 in the US, where it is marketed by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. as Campath®, and in Europe, where it is named MabCampath®.

Alemtuzumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to a specific target, CD52, on cell surfaces and directs the body’s immune system to destroy those cells. It is the first and only monoclonal antibody approved by the FDA for the treatment of patients with B-CLL.

Genzyme and Bayer are co-developing alemtuzumab in oncology and multiple sclerosis. Bayer holds exclusive worldwide marketing and distribution rights to alemtuzumab.

Campath for B-CLL has a boxed warning that includes information on cytopenias, infusion reactions, and infections. The most commonly reported adverse reactions in patients with B-CLL were infusion reactions (fever, chills, hypotension, urticaria, nausea, rash, tachycardia, dyspnea), cytopenias (neutropenia, lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia), and infections (CMV viremia, CMV infection, other infections). Other commonly reported adverse reactions include vomiting, abdominal pain, insomnia and anxiety. The most commonly reported serious adverse reactions are cytopenias, infusion reactions, and immunosuppression/infections.

About Genzyme

One of the world's leading biotechnology companies, Genzyme is dedicated to making a major positive impact on the lives of people with serious diseases. Since 1981, the company has grown from a small start-up to a diversified enterprise with more than 10,000 employees in locations spanning the globe and 2007 revenues of $3.8 billion. In 2007, Genzyme was chosen to receive the National Medal of Technology, the highest honor awarded by the President of the United States for technological innovation.

With many established products and services helping patients in nearly 90 countries, Genzyme is a leader in the effort to develop and apply the most advanced technologies in the life sciences. The company's products and services are focused on rare inherited disorders, kidney disease, orthopaedics, cancer, transplant and immune disease, and diagnostic testing. Genzyme's commitment to innovation continues today with a substantial development program focused on these fields, as well as cardiovascular disease, neurodegenerative diseases, and other areas of unmet medical need.

About Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. is the U.S.-based pharmaceuticals business of Bayer HealthCare LLC, a subsidiary of Bayer AG. Bayer HealthCare is one of the world's leading, innovative companies in the healthcare and medical products industry, and combines the activities of the Animal Health, Consumer Care, Diabetes Care, and Pharmaceuticals divisions. Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals comprises the following business units: Women's Healthcare, Diagnostic Imaging, General Medicine, which includes Cardiology and Primary Care and Specialty Medicine, which includes Hematology, Oncology and Multiple Sclerosis. The company's aim is to discover and manufacture products that will improve human health worldwide by diagnosing, preventing and treating diseases.

This press release contains forward-looking statements regarding Genzyme’s future plans and business strategies, including: its expectations for the success of alemtuzumab to treat MS, and its expectations regarding the information to be gained from the phase 2 extension trial. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in these forward-looking statements, including: that the phase 3 trials are not successful; that the phase 2 extension trial fails to produce the anticipated results regarding longer-term effects; and the risks and uncertainties described in reports filed by Genzyme with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including without limitation the information under the heading "Risk Factors" in Genzyme’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2008. Genzyme cautions investors not to place substantial reliance on the forward-looking statements contained in this press release. These statements speak only as of the date of this press release, and Genzyme undertakes no obligation to update or revise these statements.

This news release contains forward-looking statements based on current assumptions and forecasts made by Bayer Group management. Various known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors could lead to material differences between the actual future results, financial situation, development or performance of the company and the estimates given here. These factors include those discussed in our public reports filed with the Frankfurt Stock Exchange and with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (including Form 20-F). The company assumes no liability whatsoever to update these forward-looking statements or to conform them to future events or developments.

Genzyme®, Campath®, and MabCampath® are registered trademarks of Genzyme Corporation. All rights reserved. Rebif® is a registered trademark of EMD Serono, Inc.

Genzyme’s press releases and other company information are available at www.genzyme.com and by calling Genzyme’s investor information line at 1-800-905-4369 within the United States or 1-678-999-4572 outside the United States.

Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. press releases and other information are available at www.bayerus.com.

Editor’s Note: This study appears in the October 23, 2008 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. The citation is N Engl J Med 2008;359:1786-1801.

Terms and Conditions of Use | Privacy Policy | © 2002-2008 Genzyme Corporation. All rights reserved.

Improving Therapeutic Options for Multiple Sclerosis





Improving Therapeutic Options for Multiple Sclerosis: An Interview With Edward Fox, MD, PhD

Elizabeth Samander, PhD

Medscape Neurology & Neurosurgery. 2008; ©2008 Medscape
Posted 10/16/2008

Editor's Note

New data from key trials in multiple sclerosis (MS) regarding novel therapeutic approaches were presented at the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis held from September 17-20, 2008, in Montreal, Canada. Medscape Scientific Director Elizabeth Samander, PhD, interviewed Edward Fox, MD, PhD, about the results of these trials and what implications these results may have on clinical practice and the future management of patients with MS.

Medscape: Dr. Fox, in your opinion, what were the most compelling research findings presented at the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (WCTRIMS) meeting this year?

Dr. Fox: The overall message from the meeting this year was that a number of medications are currently being investigated that hold great promise for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). Research was presented from numerous trials involving novel therapies, including monoclonal antibody and oral products. There was a substantial amount of evidence presented on both of those categories, including further data from completed phase 2 trials and descriptions of ongoing phase 3 trials. The number of medications that we have under current investigation is really quite large, so it is difficult to see the timeline for these medicines actually being brought to market. We had hoped that these studies would fully enroll quickly, so that we would have finalized data coming within the next few years. However, it is likely that there will be some delays because of the large number of competing trials with slower-than-expected enrollment.

Monoclonal antibody agents discussed at the meeting included alemtuzumab, rituximab, and daclizumab.[1-6] Those antibodies have certainly been well-tested in phase 2 trials, and plans are ongoing for phase 3 trials in relapsing-remitting MS. There was also a phase 3 trial regarding rituximab[1,5,7] for the treatment of primary progressive MS. The primary endpoint of time to confirmed disease progression did not show a statistically significant difference between rituximab and placebo. However, subcohort analysis suggested a benefit for those patients with active magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at entry into the study. I think that the overall feeling about B-cell depletion in the treatment of MS is very positive. We are looking forward to other studies, including ones on ocrelizumab,[8] another monoclonal antibody, which can selectively deplete B cells and thereby reduce MS disease activity.

The data presented on the alemtuzumab trial was further information from the phase 2 trial, which showed a highly significant decrease in the number of relapses seen in patients on alemtuzumab compared with patients receiving interferon beta-1a subcutaneously 3 times weekly.[4] The data presented were on a 3 year follow-up trial designed to evaluate the percentage of patients who were clinically disease-free. These were patients who did not have relapses and did not have a progression of disability during the course of the trial. The superiority of alemtuzumab compared with beta-interferon was sustained throughout the 3 years on study. Within the third year it was found that 71% of the patients who were on alemtuzumab were clinically disease-free compared with 38% of those who were receiving interferon beta-1a. These findings have led to the development of 2 phase 3 trials currently enrolling patients.

Medscape: What other novel therapeutic approaches are undergoing clinical trials?

Dr. Fox: The oral medications discussed at this meeting included cladribine,[9-11] fingolimod,[12-14] BG-00012,[15,16] teriflunomide,[1,13,17] and laquinimod.[18] All of these oral agents, as well as several others, are showing promise for the treatment of MS. It may be that any or all of these products will have success in the treatment of MS, but at this time we're still in the discovery phase for the safety as well as for the efficacy of these medications.

The phase 2 trials that have been performed have primarily been based on looking for a reduction in new MRI activity in patients with multiple sclerosis. They all have shown various degrees of benefit in reducing gadolinium-enhancing lesions on MRIs during the course of the phase 2 trials. However, these trials were rather short and generally were not powered to show significant clinical outcomes. An exception was the phase 2 trial on fingolimod, which did show a substantial reduction in relapse rate as well.

The phase 3 trials are going to be looking not only at reduction in MRI activity, but will also be looking at the important clinical measures that will be required for these medications to be licensed. Those include a reduction in relapse rate and prevention of sustained accumulation of disability compared with placebo. These clinical outcome measures may or may not be found despite the MRI evidence that has been seen in the past, because there has been a disconnect between MRI activity and clinical activity seen in several previous agents tested for MS.

Medscape: There is evidence that disease-modifying treatments, although partially effective, are associated with injection-related side effects and suboptimal patient adherence. These findings may suggest that novel therapeutic strategies, including oral therapies, monoclonal antibodies, symptomatic treatments, and combination regimens, are warranted. What is the role of these novel agents in the therapeutic armamentarium with respect to first-line use, add-on treatment for failed first-line therapy, or as an effective induction agent?

Dr. Fox: Certainly our hope is that there's going to be an increased number of agents available for the treatment of MS, but it's going to be necessary to determine at what stage of disease we would use these medications.[19] The strategy of phase 3 trials is typically in first-line treatment of relapsing-remitting MS, in a placebo-controlled trial evaluating medication over a period of 2 years. This certainly gives us an idea as to what its overall effectiveness can be, and the newer treatments will be evaluated for the ability to reduce relapses and accumulation of disability. Phase 3 trials will also have to show an acceptable safety profile and risk management plan. The first-line agents that we currently have on the market, glatiramer acetate and the beta interferons, will likely continue to have a role in first-line therapy when we look at long-term efficacy and safety measures of the newer medicines. It will likely take a number of years to determine the true safety of the monoclonal and oral agents, and their overall use as first-line therapies will depend on these data.

The concern that we have about using any of the new agents as an add-on treatment for failed first-line therapy is again, a safety issue. If it's being used in a combination with other immunomodulatory or immunosuppressive therapy, we cannot currently define the safety of such an approach. This has been a major concern lately with the findings of opportunistic infections such as progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in patients who are immunosuppressed. Switching from ineffective first-line therapy to a new therapy is going to be the most likely use in clinical practice soon after these agents reach the market.

Using any of these agents as an effective induction agent is going to require more data from trials where this has been specifically tried. Older medications such as mitoxantrone have been tested as induction therapies with some very favorable results, but the novel agents that are being investigated right now have not been similarly tested.[20-24] Therefore, I believe that the novel agents are likely to be used as first-line or second-line agents rather than initially as induction agents.

Medscape: What is the evidence for agents optimized for neuroprotection and neurorepair?

Dr. Fox: Ideally, any medication that we use as a preventive medicine for MS would have neuroprotective and neurorepair abilities. Research has shown a frequent association of better clinical outcomes if there's prevention of atrophy. The concept of neuroprotection is that we are preventing axonal loss and neuronal loss during the early stages of MS prior to the onset of disability. All of the trials that are looking at atrophy measures are addressing this issue to some degree, but we would like to have advanced imaging metrics to look more directly at the preservation of axonal and neuronal function.

The World Congress and Treatment for Research of Multiple Sclerosis Meeting had a substantial amount of data that were presented regarding these advanced imaging metrics, including magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) and magnetization transfer imaging (MTR). Measurement of neuronal loss by optical coherence tomography (OCT) is also a very promising method of evaluating the degree of atrophy seen in MS.[25] It is likely that the novel therapies currently being investigated will also be tested in a similar manner. It is reassuring to know that we are seeing some positive data on neuroprotection. Improving repair mechanisms may require a new type of medication that would stimulate the production of new myelin growth rather than working as an immunosuppressant medication.

Medscape: What are the limitations and benefits of these novel therapeutic agents, with respect to safety and efficacy, compared with long-approved therapies such as interferon beta and glatiramer acetate?

Dr. Fox: The-first line therapies that we are currently using for the treatment of MS have been on the market for a number of years. The users of these medicines have a certain comfort level with these medications now and the understanding that the long-term data have indicated a relatively good safety profile.

Immunomodulating therapies do not appear to cause the degree of risk that the immunosuppressant therapies may cause. We understand the risk-benefit ratios of the medicines that have been on the market for a number of years, but the novel therapies that are currently under investigation will undoubtedly have a higher degree of uncertainty as to their safety for many years to come. It is quite possible that the novel therapies are going to have immunosuppressant activity that could lead to increased risk for opportunistic infections, limiting their use as first-line therapies.

The efficacy measures, on the other hand, may show direct or indirect evidence of superiority to the first-line therapies. If indeed the therapeutic abilities of these novel therapies are great enough, then we may accept a higher risk potential with these medications and use them as first-line therapy. However, I don't think that the true measure of a medication's safety will be known at the time it enters the market.

Medscape: Does the increase of potential therapeutic agents complicate how to choose first-line therapy?

Dr. Fox: I think with the advent of more choices, we're going to have a greater divide among practicing neurologists as to how they approach the disease. Right now there's fairly good uniformity among neurologists in terms of how to treat early MS. There are differences in opinion about the optimal medication strategies for people with aggressive or chronic disease. But early active disease is currently treated by a limited number of agents that have relatively similar outcome measures in terms of their ability to control the disease. If we have new medicines available to us over the next several years that have a much different risk-benefit ratio with greater promise of disease control but increased risk, I feel that there's likely to be a group of neurologists who will use these medications first line. But there will be a number of other neurologists who are much more conservative in their acceptance of the new medications and will limit the new medicines only to those patients who have failed existing therapies.

Medscape: The fields of genetics and proteomics are beginning to play a large part in the discovery of novel therapeutic targets. How do these newly identified targets impact the development of individualized therapeutic strategies?

Dr. Fox: As we understand the pathology of MS better, we may find that certain medications are tailored for some patients more than others. For example, the biomarkers that may eventually be used for MS would determine whether we would want to use therapies that were depleters of B cells, T cells, monocytes, or a wide-spectrum immunosuppressant.[26,27] Critical to this line of thinking is the understanding of the mechanism of action of our current medications, which remains somewhat murky to this day, because MS is a highly variable and unpredictable disease with different pathologies among different patients. If we understood the pharmacogenomics of MS better, we might be able to tailor appropriate therapies much more accurately.

Medscape: What are some of the outstanding challenges in the treatment of MS that need to be addressed in the future?

Dr. Fox: Balancing the risks and benefits of medications in the treatment of MS has become increasingly important in the last few years. The major challenge in understanding the nature of this disease is elucidating the prognostic factors for an individual patient, so that we may prevent the development of permanent disability that at this point cannot be alleviated. If we can determine which patients have early, aggressive MS before the development of axonal loss and atrophy, we stand a much greater chance of being able to appropriately determine who might require stronger immunosuppressant. Our challenge going forward is to address both the inflammatory and the degenerative nature of MS with medications that effectively control the disease. Data presented at the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis suggests we are now closer to that goal.

Medscape: Thank you Dr. Fox for sharing this information and your insights with us today.

This activity is supported by an independent educational grant from Teva.
References

1. Linker RA, Kieseier BC, Gold R. Identification and development of new therapeutics for multiple sclerosis. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2008 Sep 17. [Epub ahead of print].
2. Gasperini C, Cefaro LA, Borriello G, et al. Emerging oral drugs for multiple sclerosis. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs. 2008;13:465-477. Abstract
3. Burton JM, O'Connor P. Novel oral agents for multiple sclerosis. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2007;7:223-230. Abstract
4. Brinar V for the CAMMS223 Study Group. Alemtuzumab Phase 2 Extension Study Design (CAMMS223): assessing long-term outcomes and potential benefits of additional alemtuzumab treatment in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P17.
5. Naismith R, Trinkaus K, Fairbairn M, Lauber J, Piccio L, Cross A. Rituximab as add-on therapy for breakthrough disease: clinical effects over 24 weeks. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P476.
6. Neyer L, Singer R, Wang H, Caras I. Daclizumab exhibits efficacy in multiple sclerosis subjects positive for interferon-beta neutralizing antibodies. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P479.
7. Hawker K. Efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. Parallel Session 10 of Late Breaking News of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Scientific Program S78.
8. Dörner T, Burmester GR. New approaches of B-cell-directed therapy beyond rituximab. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2008;20:263-268. Abstract
9. Guarnaccia J, Rinder H, Smith B. Preferential effects of cladribine on lymphocyte subpopulations. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P55.
10. Laugel B, Challier J, Siegfried C, Chvatchko Y, Weissert R, Galibert L. Cladribine exerts a modulatory effect on T-cell activation. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P80.
11. Rieckmann P, Giovannoni G, Cook S, et al, for the CLARITY Study Group. Cladribine tablets in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: study design of the 2-year, phase III b CLA RITY (CLA dRibine tablets Treating multiple sclerosis orallY) extension study. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P453.
12. Kappos L, Radue E, O'Connor P, et al., for the FREEDOMS Study Group. Oral fingolimod (FTY 720) in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis: 3-year results from a phase II study extension. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P72.
13. Kappos L, Polman C, Radue E, et al. Oral fingolimod (FTY 720) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: baseline patient demographics and disease characteristics from a 2-year phase III trial (FREEDOMS). Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P73.
14. Montalban X, Comi G, Anel J, et al. Oral fingolimod (FTY 720) in relapsing multiple sclerosis: impact on health-related quality of life in a phase II study Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P400.
15. MacManus D, Miller D, Kappos L, R. Gold, et al. The effect of BG00012 on conversion of gadolinium-enhancing lesions to T1-hypointense lesions. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P459.
16. Gold R, Kappos L, Miller D, et al. Safety profile of BG00012, an oral formulation of dimethyl fumarate for patients with relapsing MS. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P50.
17. Tallantyre E, Evangelou N, Constantinescu CS. Spotlight on terfilunomide. Int MS J. 2008;15:62-68. Abstract
18. Comi G, Abramsky O, Arbizu T, et al., for the LAQ/5062 Clinical Advisory Board and Study Group. Oral laquinimod in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: 9-month double-blind active extension of the multi-center, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group placebo-controlled study. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P31.
19. Gold R. Combination therapies in multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 2008;255 Suppl 1:51-60.
20. Vollmer T, Panitch H, Bar-Or A, et al. Glatiramer acetate after induction therapy with mitoxantrone in relapsing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2008;14:663-670. Abstract
21. Le Page E, Leray E, Taurin G, et al. Mitoxantrone as induction treatment in aggressive relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: treatment response factors in a 5 year follow-up observational study of 100 consecutive patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008;79:52-56. Abstract
22. Filippi M, Le Page E, Leray E, Edan G, Comi G. Magnetic resonance imaging results of a 3-year randomized trial comparing two therapeutic strategies in aggressive relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: mitoxantrone as induction for 6 months followed by interferon-b-1b versus interferon-b-1b. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P254.
23. Perumal J, Hreha S, Caon C, et al. Intense immunosuppression as the initial disease-modifying therapy in clinically active relapsing multiple sclerosis. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P490.
24. Ramathal J, Boggild M. Glatiramer acetate following mitoxantrone induction in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: extended experience. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P498.
25. Balcer L. OCT: window on multiple sclerosis. Parallel Session 5 of Advances in Imaging Techniques of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Scientific Program S43.
26. Garcia-Montojo M, Alvarez-Lafuente R, Dominguez-Mozo M, De las Hera V, Bartolome F, Arroyo R. MxA and MMP-9/TI MP-1 ratio as biomarkers of treatment efficacy and disease activity in multiple sclerosis patients. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster 452.
27. Melnikov A, Scholtens D, Reder A, Balabanov R, Stefoski D, Levenson V. Composite methylation profiles of blood DNA as biomarkers for multiple sclerosis. Disease-modifying therapy-part 2. Program and abstracts of the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis; September 17-20, 2008; Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Poster P869.


Interviewer: Elizabeth Samander, PhD, Scientific Director, Medscape LLC

Interviewee: Edward J. Fox, MD, PhD, Clinical Assistant Professor, University of Texas Medical Branch, Round Rock, Texas

Disclosure for Interviewer: Elizabeth Samander, PhD, is a member of the professional editorial group at Medscape and has reported no relevant financial relationships.

Disclosure for Interviewee: Edward J. Fox, MD, PhD, has disclosed that he has received grants for clinical research from Biogen-Idec, BioMS, EMD-Serono, Genzyme, Opexa Therapeutics, Sanofi-Aventis, and Teva Neuroscience. Dr. Fox has also disclosed that he has received grants for educational activities from Bayer, Biogen-Idec, EMD-Serono, Pfizer, and Teva Neuroscience. Dr. Fox has also disclosed that he has served as an advisor or consultant to Bayer, Biogen-Idec, EMD-Serono, Genzyme, Opexa Therapeutics, and Teva Neuroscience.

Monday, September 22, 2008

NEW LONG-TERM DATA SHOW THAT PATIENTS TAKING AVONEX® FOR UP TO 15 YEARS EXPERIENCE REDUCED DISABILITY PROGRESSION AND IMPROVED QUALITY OF LIFE


NEW LONG-TERM DATA SHOW THAT PATIENTS TAKING AVONEX® FOR UP TO 15 YEARS EXPERIENCE REDUCED DISABILITY PROGRESSION AND IMPROVED QUALITY OF LIFE

MONTREAL, CANADA - September 18, 2008 - Biogen Idec (NASDAQ: BIIB) today announced that data was presented from the ASSURANCE (ASSessment of Drug Utilization, EaRly TreAtmeNt, and Clinical OutcomEs) study, showing the long-term benefits of AVONEX® (interferon beta-1a IM) therapy in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) for up to 15 years. The ASSURANCE study represents the long-term follow-up of patients who participated in the Multiple Sclerosis Collaborative Research Group (MSCRG), the original Phase III pivotal trial from which AVONEX was approved. Data from this study were presented today as a poster presentation at the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis in Montreal, Canada. This is the first joint meeting of the Americas Committee on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ACTRIMS) and its counterparts in Europe and Latin America: ECTRIMS and LACTRIMS.


MONTREAL, CANADA - September 18, 2008 - Biogen Idec (NASDAQ: BIIB) today announced that data was presented from the ASSURANCE (ASSessment of Drug Utilization, EaRly TreAtmeNt, and Clinical OutcomEs) study, showing the long-term benefits of AVONEX® (interferon beta-1a IM) therapy in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) for up to 15 years. The ASSURANCE study represents the long-term follow-up of patients who participated in the Multiple Sclerosis Collaborative Research Group (MSCRG), the original Phase III pivotal trial from which AVONEX was approved. Data from this study were presented today as a poster presentation at the World Congress on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis in Montreal, Canada. This is the first joint meeting of the Americas Committee on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ACTRIMS) and its counterparts in Europe and Latin America: ECTRIMS and LACTRIMS.

"As a physician, my goal in treating my MS patients is to delay disability progression and help them maintain their normal lifestyle for as long as possible," said Robert Bermel, MD, Mellen Center for Multiple Sclerosis Treatment and Research, Cleveland Clinic. "This follow-up study identifies a group of patients who achieved benefits from long-term treatment, and underscores the importance of starting on and continuing an effective therapy for MS."

The data from the study show that patients currently taking AVONEX for up to 15 years (range of 3 - 15 years) versus those not on AVONEX therapy reported:

* Significantly lower disability progression as measured by a mean change in Expanded Disability Scale Scores (EDSS) of 2.3 vs. 3.3 (p=0.011) from MSCRG baseline;
* Lower disability progression to EDSS milestones four (64% vs. 83%, p=0.06), six (32% vs. 62%, p=0.008) and seven (9% vs. 33%, p=0.008);
* Greater quality of life as measured by the physical component score of the SF-36 (p<0.0001);
* Significantly greater sense of independence in self care (p=0.0019); and
* Significantly more independent living (p=0.031).

ASSURANCE was an open-label, retrospective, patient-reported, multicenter, 15-year follow-up study that included patients with relapsing MS who received ≤ 2 years of treatment in the pivotal Phase III trial (n=172). One hundred thirty-six of a possible 172 patients enrolled in the study. Patients were categorized as current AVONEX users and non-AVONEX users. Forty-six percent of those patients were currently taking AVONEX, with median treatment duration of 13.3 years. Patients not currently on AVONEX were treated with a number of other disease-modifying therapies, with 24 percent of patients undergoing treatment with TYSABRI® (natalizumab).

"This level of impact on disability and quality of life over the course of 15 years reinforces the real-life benefits and proven clinical effectiveness of AVONEX," said Thorsten Eickenhorst, MD, Vice President of Global Medical Affairs, Biogen Idec. "We pride ourselves on providing a treatment that is not only efficacious now but will continue to offer patients the support they need for as long as possible."
About AVONEX

AVONEX is the most prescribed treatment for relapsing forms of MS worldwide, with more than 130,000 patients on therapy. It was launched in the U.S. in 1996 and in Europe in 1997 for the treatment of relapsing forms of MS to slow the progression of disability and reduce relapses. AVONEX has been proven effective in clinical trials for up to three years. AVONEX is marketed internationally in more than 90 countries. AVONEX was the first treatment approved for patients who have their first clinical MS attack and have a brain MRI scan consistent with MS; this use was approved in Europe in 2002 and in the U.S. in 2003.

The most common side effects associated with AVONEX multiple sclerosis treatment are flu-like symptoms, including myalgia, fever, fatigue, headache, chills, nausea, vomiting, pain, and asthenia.

AVONEX should be used with caution in patients with depression or other mood disorders and in patients with seizure disorders. AVONEX should not be used by pregnant women. Patients with cardiac disease should be closely monitored. Patients should also be monitored for signs of hepatic injury. Routine periodic blood chemistry and hematology tests are recommended during treatment with AVONEX. Rare cases of anaphylaxis have been reported. For more information, visit www.AVONEX.com
About Biogen Idec

Biogen Idec creates new standards of care in therapeutic areas with high unmet medical needs. Founded in 1978, Biogen Idec is a global leader in the discovery, development, manufacturing, and commercialization of innovative therapies. Patients in more than 90 countries benefit from Biogen Idec's significant products that address diseases such as lymphoma, multiple sclerosis, and rheumatoid arthritis. For product labeling, press releases and additional information about the company, please visit www.biogenidec.com.

For more information contact:

Media Contacts:

Shannon Altimari
617-914-6524

Investor Contacts:

Eric Hoffman
617-679-2812

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Drug Combo With Antibiotic May Slow MS Progression





MONDAY, Dec. 10 (HealthDay News) -- Combining an antibiotic with a medication currently used to treat multiple sclerosis may slow progression of the disease, according to researchers at the Louisiana State Health Sciences Center in Shreveport.
Their study included 15 patients (average age 44.5) with relapsing-remitting MS who'd been taking interferon for at least six months and were experiencing symptoms and developing new brain lesions.

For four months, the patients took 100 milligrams daily of the antibiotic doxycycline in addition to their interferon therapy. During the study, they had monthly neurological examinations, MRI brain scans and blood work.

At the end of the four months, 60 percent of the patients had a more than 25 percent reduction in the number of brain lesions. Patients also had lower disability scores. One patient relapsed. Side effects were mild and included only the known side effects of the two drugs individually, rather than side effects caused by combining the two medications, the researchers said.

The study, funded by Biogen Idec Inc., was posted online Dec. 10 and will be published in the February 2008 print issue of the Archives of Neurology.

"There is a growing interest in combination therapy in patients with MS to stabilize the clinical course, reduce the rate of clinical relapses and decelerate the progressive course of the underlying pathologic mechanism," the study authors wrote. "Overall, data from this cohort suggest that the treatment combination of oral doxycycline and interferon beta-1a may be safe and effective in some patients with MS; however, further controlled clinical trials are warranted to demonstrate safety and efficacy in a larger patient population."

Monday, December 10, 2007

ECTRIMS 2007: Understanding MS: Pathogenesis, Neuroinflammation, and Degeneration CME





The materials presented here were prepared by independent authors under the editorial supervision of Medscape and do not represent a publication of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis. These materials and the related activity are not sanctioned by the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis or the commercial supporter of the conference and do not constitute an official part of that conference.

Release Date: November 29, 2007;


The Impact and Burden of Multiple Sclerosis
Prevalence, Epidemiology, and Economic Burden

The national and regional prevalence of multiple sclerosis (MS) in France was reported at the 2007 European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS) meeting, showing the overall prevalence in France and its 22 regions using the same methodology for the first time.[1] The computerized database of the National Health Insurance system (Caisse Nationale d'Assurance Maladie [CNAM]) assessed 80% of the French population or 54,974,101 people. The national and regional prevalence was estimated on October 10, 2004. There were 49,626 cases of MS on the CNAM database on the prevalence date. The national prevalence was 90.3 per 100,000 (2.6 female-to-male ratio). The northern and eastern regions had a higher prevalence (101.1-122.2 per 100,000) compared with the western and southern regions (78.5-84.3), with the central region having an intermediate prevalence (84.3-101.1 per 100,000). The prevalence in Northeast France was 1.5 times that of Southwest France. These observations are consistent with the previously reported data of the heterogeneous distribution of MS in Europe between Northern and Southern European countries.

In Japan there is a geographic phenotype difference in MS. Two distinct subtypes of MS occur in Asians: optic-spinal multiple sclerosis (OCMS or neuromyelitis optica) and conventional multiple sclerosis (CMS). From 4 nationwide surveys in Japan taken in 1972, 1982, 1989, and 2004, 9900 patients with MS were seen with a prevalence of 7.7/100,000.[2] OCMS was more common in southern Japan, whereas CMS was more common in the north. Peak age of onset in patients declined from their early 30s in 1972 to their early 20s in 2004. The proportion of patients with OCMS decreased over the observation period from 1972 to 2004. The frequency of CMS remained predominant in the northern regions.

In another epidemiologic presentation from Japan,[3] an increasing incidence of MS in the Tokachi province of Hokkaido (the northernmost island of Japan) was noted over a 30-year period. Two epidemiologic surveys were conducted to assess the prevalence of MS in 2001 and 2006. The Tokachi province had a population of 350,000 in 2001 and 360,000 in 2006. In 2001 the prevalence of MS that satisfied the Poser criteria was 8.6/100,000 and 13.1/100,000 in 2006. The mean age at the prevalence day was 41.0 years old and the mean age at onset was 28.4. The mean duration of disease was 12.6 years. The rate of primary progressive MS was 4%; relapsing-remitting MS was 70%; and secondary progressive MS was 26%. The prevalence of OCMS was 1.7/100,000 in both 2001 and 2006 showing no change compared with CMS. From prior data, it was known that the mean annual incidence increase of MS was 0.15 from 1975 to 1989 but 0.68 from 1990 to 2004. It appears that the increased prevalence of MS in northern Japan may be due to the increased incidence since 1990.

Since disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have been available, considerable healthcare resources are used by MS patients. A healthcare utilization survey was carried out from a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant commercial administrative claims database. The database contained integrated inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy records on over 12 million persons from all major US regions, with the diagnostic International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) code for MS (340.xx) as the first or second diagnosis.[4] The time span analyzed ranged from June 2005 to June 2006. The results found 12,216 identified MS patients, 77% of whom were women, and 84% aged 30-59 years (mean, 47 years). Fifty-six percent used at least 1 DMT. Interferon (IFN) beta-1a (intramuscular) was most common (19.8%), followed by glatiramer acetate (19.4%), INF IFN beta-1a subcutaneous (10.2%), IFN beta-1b (9.2%), and mitoxantrone (0.9%). Six percent received 2 or more DMTs. Those who used DMT were more likely to use symptomatic treatments: Forty-three percent used medications for depression, 31% for spasticity, 25% for bladder symptoms, 19% for fatigue, and 28% for pain or dysesthesiae. Twelve percent of patients were admitted to a hospital (56% condition-related); 11% had emergency department visits (13% condition-related); 2.4% had intensive care unit stays (44% condition-related); and 1.8% had skilled nursing facility stays (58% condition-related). Even though DMTs are available to the majority of MS patients, only 56% of the MS patients in this particular survey chose to take DMTs, but a significant amount of healthcare resources was still used by this group creating costs beyond the cost of the DMTs. This could be interpreted to suggest that improved treatments are needed to reduce the current healthcare as well as personal burden of MS.

Impact on Patients' Quality of Life and Cognition

Studies examining the impact of stressful life events on MS exacerbations have given conflicting results. However, a study of war stress from the Carmel Medical Center in Haifa, Israel, after the Hezbollah-Israeli war in 2006, showed a significant increase in MS exacerbations compared with similar time periods prior to the war.[5] The influence of psychological coping strategies was also examined.

Participants in the study were 156 MS patients with relapsing-remitting MS, all residents of northern Israel who were followed regularly at the MS clinic. The number of severe relapses treated with steroids during and following the war were compared with similar time periods at the preceding year. Exposure to war events, resulting subjective stress, and psychological coping strategies were evaluated by means of structured interviews. The results of the study indicated that 18 relapses occurred compared with 1-7 relapses in similar time periods over the 13 months prior to the war (P = .001-.02, McNemar's test). The percentage of patients reporting intense stress among wartime relapse patients compared with remission patients was significant (44% vs 20%, P = .03). The percentage of patients reporting high levels of stress from rocket attacks was higher in relapsing patients (67% vs 42%, P = .05). Home evacuation stress was higher in relapsing patients (33% vs 11%, P = .02). Active coping mechanisms, such as planning ahead for home displacement, were used less frequently by patients with relapses (17% vs 47%, P = .01).

Three variables were selected as predictors of wartime relapse by a logistic regression model: subjective sense of stress, distress associated with displacement, and MS relapse in the previous year. Active coping reduced the risk for an exacerbation. The conclusions of the study indicated that the risk for an exacerbation is increased by wartime stress but can be reduced with active coping measures. This suggests a role for preventive measures in dealing with stress-related exacerbations.

Fatigue is the most frequent complaint of MS patients, even those with low Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores. Fatigue affects quality of life for many individuals and is the main burden on the health and socioeconomic system. Two studies with longitudinal evaluation over 2 years analyzed variables in regard to fatigue in MS. In the study from the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, Sweden,[6] 219 outpatients were assessed every 6 months with the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). Personal and environmental factors (sex, age, sense of coherence, living with a partner, living with children, work status, and immunomodulatory treatment) were correlated. The results showed that the FSS varied over the 2 years, with 54% changing FSS category 1 or several times. Twenty-seven percent were persistently fatigued and 19% never fatigued. In those patients who had increased or persistent fatigue, mood and disease-related factors were significantly different: depression (P = .001), weak sense of coherence (P = .02), living with a partner vs not living with a partner (P = .02), not working (P = .05), more than 10 years since the diagnosis of MS and with a moderate EDSS score compared with a mild EDSS (P = .001), more than 10 years since the diagnosis of MS and with a moderate EDSS compared with a severe EDSS score (P = .02), and a moderately progressive course compared with a mild course (P = .001). The conclusions of this study were that fatigue persistently affected at least 27% of the MS population and that those with a moderate course were at greatest risk, especially with an associated depression.

Another longitudinal study of fatigue[7] showed that depression and physical impairment were significantly associated with persistent fatigue in a group of 267 MS patients followed over 2 years. Thirty-seven percent of the patients had persistent fatigue; 38% had sporadic fatigue; and 25% had no fatigue. Persistent and sporadic fatigue were not associated with disease duration, but they were significantly associated with physical impairment, primary progressive MS, insomnia, heat-sensitive fatigue, sudden-onset fatigue, and mood disturbance.

Cognitive Dysfunction

Studies have shown that up to 65% of MS patients have cognitive dysfunction and that cognitive dysfunction is the greatest cause for disability.[8] However, cognitive dysfunction is not well evaluated in the EDSS score nor in the routine office or clinic evaluation. There is a growing awareness that cognitive dysfunction in MS is underappreciated, and the large number of poster and platform presentations concerning cognition in MS at the ECTRIMS 2007 meeting reflects that awareness. It is important that both the practicing neurologist and academic neurologist take into consideration the cognitive function of their MS patients when evaluating the patient for DMT so that prevention of disability can be possibly achieved. Walking with a cane may not be a reason for loss of employment, but inability to follow or carry out directions or inability to formulate a plan of action may be disabling.

A significant percentage of patients with clinically isolated syndromes (CIS) were found to have significant cognitive dysfunction when evaluated with a comprehensive neuropsychological battery.[9] In an evaluation of 15 patients with CIS vs 15 healthy controls, 53.3% of the CIS patients compared with 0% of the controls had cognitive dysfunction. Patients were significantly impaired on tasks evaluating attention (46.6%), long-term verbal and nonverbal memory (33.3%), visuospatial skills (26.6%), executive function (20%), and learning (20%).

In a retrospective review of 71 MS patients with severe cognitive impairment in the first 10 years of their disease, 15 of the patients presented with cognitive impairment as their first and primary symptom.[10] The characteristics of these 15 patients were mean age of onset, 43 years old; 11 women, 4 men; and mean delay from symptom onset to diagnosis, 2.6 years. Oligoclonal bands in the cerebrospinal fluid were present in all but 1 patient. The cognitive dysfunction had a severe impact on daily living activities and remained the predominant feature of the disease for all patients even though physical disability remained mild (mild pyramidal, sensory, cerebellar, brainstem, or bladder signs in 11 of 15) or absent (in 4). Initial MRI pattern showed diffuse and confluent lesions in the periventricular white matter with severe cortical atrophy (n = 7, pattern A). Others showed focal white matter lesions typical of MS with little or no atrophy (n = 8, pattern B). Two patients' MRIs evolved from pattern B to pattern A in 2-5 years. Clinicians need to be aware that MS-related cognitive dysfunction can be disabling even with little or no physical disability.

Available Pharmacologic Therapies

There are 6 US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved DMTs in the United States at this time. These DMTs are IFN beta-1a (intramuscular or subcutaneous), IFN beta-1b, glatiramer acetate, mitoxantrone, and natalizumab. All of these treatments have shown significant reduction of relapse rate and MRI lesions compared with controls. There are some data from pivotal studies to suggest a reduction of disability but long-term prevention of disability needs further evaluation.

Because cognitive dysfunction is the main cause of disability in patients with MS, and brain atrophy is highly associated with cognitive dysfunction, reduction of brain atrophy is a potentially important marker for the prevention of disability -- more important than the EDSS. In the AFFIRM study there was a more rapid brain parenchymal fraction (BPF) reduction in patients receiving natalizumab compared with patients receiving placebo during the first year (0.56 vs 0.24%) than the second year (0.24% vs 0.43%).[11] The question of why this may have occurred includes a time lag between inflammation and subsequent tissue loss (or atrophy in which the decrease in BPF during the first year may be an inevitable consequence of inflammation and tissue damage that occurred prior to initiation of treatment) or "pseudoatrophy" as an initial decrease in BPF from resolution of edema and inflammatory infiltrate rather than actual tissue loss.

To answer these questions, an analysis was conducted on the kinetics of brain atrophy during the first year of treatment with natalizumab from the AFFIRM study. Drs. Fisher and Rudick from the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio,[12] presented further evaluation of the kinetics of brain atrophy and the relationship between inflammatory lesions and BPF during natalizumab treatment. The study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study of 213 patients, of which 148 (100 natalizumab, 48 placebo) had analyzable MRI scans. The scans were performed at 1 month prior to the study, at month 0 (baseline), monthly for 6 months, and at months 9 and 12. The 2 treatment arms of natalizumab (3 mg/kg and 6 mg/kg) were combined for all statistical analyses. The results showed an initial decrease in BPF in the early treatment period, followed by a leveling off after month 4 to the end of the treatment period (month 12). This pattern of BPF change is most suggestive of pseudoatrophy, which is consistent with an anti-inflammatory effect followed by a reduced atrophy rate in the late treatment phase. Therefore, this pattern of decrease in brain volume during the study suggests that natalizumab may have a beneficial effect on brain atrophy, beginning about 4 months after treatment initiation.

As of September 21, 2007, a total of 26,200 patients have been exposed to natalizumab,[13] with no new cases of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy reported. Seventeen thousand patients remain on natalizumab as of October 2007. The overall rate of serious hypersensitivity reactions is 0.64%, usually at the second infusion. Testing for the presence of persistent antibodies to natalizumab (detected on 2 occasions at least 6 weeks apart) prior to redosing following a prolonged dose interruption is recommended because reduced efficacy and increased risk for hypersensitivity reactions are more common in these patients. Twenty-four women in the United States and Austria with MS and exposure to natalizumab at any time during the first 3 months of pregnancy have enrolled in a pregnancy registry. Twenty-one pregnancies were ongoing as of August 23, 2007 with 1 live birth, 1 spontaneous abortion, and 1 elective abortion.

Nonpharmacologic Intervention

Physical therapy is a mainstay of patients of all types with physical disabilities. Studies of MS patients have shown variable results, probably due to many reasons, such as fatigue, instability of the disease, and small sample size. The type of physical therapy also varies. In a study from Belgium,[14] the benefit between bilateral exercise ("in-phase") and alternating exercise ("antiphase") was evaluated at various speeds of repetition for 10 weeks. Exercise rates of 0.75 Hz, 1.00 Hz, 1.25 Hz, and 1.50 Hz were used. Patients had mild-to-moderate disabilities (EDSS scores from 1.5 to 6.5). Coordination accuracy and stability were measured at baseline and at 10 weeks. The results showed that physical intervention programs with emphasis on strength do not influence motor control of the lower limbs after a 10-week intervention period. Antiphase training is performed with the lowest accuracy at the lowest frequency but improves when frequency increases. This is a particular finding in MS patients and contrasts with the current literature in regard to healthy subjects. This study also found that motor control and the EDSS were not correlated, probably due to the fact that EDSS is a rough picture of the distance that an MS patient can walk, whereas motor control is about stability and accuracy.

A comprehensive rehabilitation program showed improvement of MS patients with primarily pyramidal impairment and mild-to-moderate MS in both activities of daily living and mobility.[15] In a study with 200 patients in an inpatient multidisciplinary program, patients were assessed at the beginning and end of admission with the EDSS. Functional status was evaluated with the Barthel Index and Rivermead Mobility Index. Sixty-five percent were women, with a mean age of 50 and mean duration of disease of 17.3 years. All patients were enrolled in an individualized, goal-oriented, multidisciplinary inpatient program on the basis of practical skills of daily living. Results of rehabilitation were assessed in the whole sample as well as by comparing 3 subgroups: a mild group (EDSS 2-5.5), moderate group (EDSS 6-65), and severe group (EDSS 7-8.5). The results of the program showed greater improvement in patients in the mild and moderate groups, although the severe group did show some improvement. Pyramidal impairment was the greatest predictor of mobility and activities of daily living.

In another rehabilitation study,[16] patients were randomized to 3 treatment groups: outpatient, inpatient, and day hospital. There were 9 patients in each group for a total of 27 patients. The outpatient group (mean EDSS of 6.0) had 1-hour rehabilitation training twice weekly; the inpatient group (mean EDSS of 5.5) had more than 2 hours daily; and the day hospital group (mean EDSS of 6.5) had 2 hours daily. Outcome measures were Berg Scale, Barthel Index, and Hauser Ambulation Scale. The program lasted 5 weeks. The results showed that all patients improved in outcome measures except for ambulation, but there was no difference among the groups. The conclusion was that outpatient rehabilitation is equally effective as inpatient or day hospital therapy, and outpatient rehabilitation saves time and economic resources.

Supported by an independent educational grant from Genentech

References


Moreau R, Kazaz E, Clerc L, et al. Prevalence of multiple sclerosis in France and its 22 regions. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S103. Abstract.
Osoegawa M, Fukazawa T, Fujihara K, et al. Temporal and geographical changes of multiple sclerosis phenotype in Japanese: nationwide survey results over 30 years. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S101-102. Abstract.
Houzen H, Niino M, Kikuchi S, et al. Increasing risk of multiple sclerosis in Japan. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S102. Abstract.
Chin P, Laouri M, Broder M, et al. Healthcare utilization among insured multiple sclerosis patients in the U.S. from 2005-2006. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S261. Abstract.
Golan D, Somer E, Dishon S, et al. War stress, psychological coping mechanisms and exacerbations of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S238. Abstract.
Johansson S, Ytterberg C, Hillbert J, et al. A longitudinal study of variations in perceived level of energy and predictors of fatigue in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S115. Abstract.
Lerdal A, Celius EG, Krupp L, et al. Longitudinal patterns of fatigue in patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S114-115. Abstract.
Rao SM. Neuropsychology of multiple sclerosis. Curr Opin Neurol. 1995;8:216-220.
Kocer B, Nazliel B, Irkec C. Cognitive dysfunction in patients with clinically isolated syndrome. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S114. Abstract.
Assouad R, Tourbah A, Sedel F, et al. Cognitive presentation in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S114. Abstract.
Miller DH, Soon D, Fernando KT, et al; AFFIRM Investigators. MRI outcomes in a placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab in relapsing MS. Neurology. 2007;68:1390-401.
Fisher E, Rudick R, Dalton CM, et al. The kinetics of brain atrophy during the first year of treatment with natalizumab. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S168. Abstract.
Panzara M, Belcher G, Kooijmans M, et al. Use of natalizumab in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis: updated safety results from TOUCH and TYGRIS. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S169. Abstract.
Alders G, Gijbels D, Feys P, et al. The effect of physical intervention programs on coordination quality of the lower limbs in persons with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S132. Abstract.
Grasso MG, Triosi E, Tonin A, et al. Effectiveness of multiple sclerosis rehabilitation. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S130. Abstract.
Giusti A, Viti B, Pirani G, et al. The effectiveness of neurological rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis: comparison between different rehabilitative settings. Mult Scler. 2007;13(suppl2):S130. Abstract.

Evaluating New Data for the Treatment of MS
New and Emerging Pharmacologic Treatments

Oral Therapies

Several new treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS) are in phase 2 or phase 3 trials. The combined analyses of subcutaneous cladribine were presented by Dr. S. Cook for the Cladribine Clinical Study Group.[1,2] The safety profile of cladribine at parenteral doses of up to 2.1 mg/kg was similar to placebo, with a sustained lymphocytic depleting effect consistent with its therapeutic mechanism. The parenteral trials included MS patients with relapsing remitting MS (RRMS), secondary progressive MS (SPMS), and primary progressive MS (PPMS). Since parenteral doses of 0.7 to 2.1 mg/kg can be achieved with oral preparations, 2 oral studies are now underway. One study, CLARITY, is a monotherapy, phase 3 trial for patients with RRMS and an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 0-5.5 for a 2-year period. It has 3 treatment arms; Group 1 receives 10-mg cladribine tablets for 4-5 days on weeks 1, 5, 9, and 13 in the first year. Group 2 receives cladribine for the first 2 treatment periods but placebo for the third and forth treatments. Group 3 receives placebo for all 4 treatments.[3] At this time, enrollment is completed with 1329 patients. The primary efficacy parameter is the relapse rate from baseline to week 96. The other oral cladribine study, ONWARD, is a phase 2b study that combines IFN-beta-1a (subcutaneous 3 times weekly, 44 mcg) with oral cladribine in an otherwise similar design.[4] The primary efficacy parameter is number of new Gd+ T1 lesions from baseline to week 96. A new subcutaneous formulation of IFN-beta-1a is being used in this trial.

Two phase 3 trials are underway with an oral fumaric acid derivation (BG00012) in patients with RRMS.[5] BG00012 has been shown in vitro to inhibit expression of cytokines and adhesion molecules involved in inflammation, with resultant anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effects. A phase 2b double-blind, placebo-controlled, 24-week study with a 24-week safety extension showed a significant 69% reduction of Gd+ T1 lesions at 720 mg/day of BG00012 compared with placebo. Additionally, patients receiving BG00012 had 48% fewer T2 lesions and 53% fewer T1 lesions compared with placebo (all P = .001). Two phase 3 studies are now underway: DEFINE (a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 2 doses of BG00012 240 mg 2 or 3 times a day vs placebo) and CONFIRM (same design but with an added comparator of glatiramer acetate). They are 2-year studies of 1000 patients and 1200 patients, respectively, with RRMS and an EDSS score of 0-5.0. The primary efficacy parameter of DEFINE is the proportion of patients relapsing over the 2 years, and the primary efficacy parameter of CONFIRM is the rate of clinical relapse at 2 years.

Monoclonal Antibody Therapies

Alemtuzumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody against the T-cell antigen CD52 on lymphocytes. Two studies evaluating alemtuzumab (ALEM) in patients with RRMS were reported at the ECTRIMS meeting. One trial was in treatment-naive patients comparing 2 doses of ALEM (either 24 mg/day intravenously [IV] for 5 days at month 0 and for 3 days at month 12 or 12 mg/day) and subcutaneous IFN-I-beta 3 times weekly at 44 mcg.[6] At 2 years, 84.4% of low-dose ALEM patients were relapse free, 90.6% of high-dose ALEM patients were relapse free, and 60.4% of IFN patients were relapse free (P = .0002 low-dose and P = .0001 high-dose). ALEM improved disability on the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) and EDSS scores. Relapses were reduced and delayed. Safety findings associated with ALEM were immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITT) and autoimmune disorders of the thyroid gland. The other trial with ALEM included MS patients who had failed prior treatment with any IFN. The patients had to have had the onset of MS in the last 5 years, EDSS scores of 0-6, IFN for at least 6 of the last 24 months, and 2 relapses.[7] Forty-five patients received 2 cycles of ALEM with 1 mg IV methylprednisolone prior to ALEM. Patients received ALEM 24 mg/day for 5 days (cycle 1) and then 24 mg/day for 3 days at month 12 (cycle 2). The result was a 9.3-fold reduction of relapse rate (relapses in 2 years prior to cycle 1 vs relapses in 2 years following; P = .0001). On disability measurements, 70% of patients had stable or improved MSFC. However, 4 cases of autoimmune thyroid disorder and 1 case of ITT developed in the 45 patients.

Daclizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that depletes CD25 from the cell surface of T cells and interacts specifically with the interleukin 2 receptor alpha chain (IL2RA). Daclizumab has shown promise as a therapy for both RRMS and SPMS in combination with INF and as monotherapy. The results of a recently completed phase 2 study with 230 patients with RRMS with EDSS scores of 0-5 and breakthrough disease while on any IFN were presented in a platform presentation.[8] There were 230 patients at 51 sites in North America and Europe. There was a 24-week double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment period and a 48-week washout period. There were 3 arms to the study: placebo add-on, 1 mg/kg subcutaneously every 4 weeks, or 2 mg/kg subcutaneously every 2 weeks. Primary endpoint was new Gd+ lesions between weeks 8 and 24. Secondary endpoints were relapse rate and safety issues. The results indicated a 25% reduction of Gd+ lesions with 1 mg/kg add-on of daclizumub (not significant [NS]) and a 72% reduction of Gd+ lesions with 2 mg/kg every 2 weeks (P = .004). Relapse rate reduction was 35% in each dosing group (NS). Daclizumab was safe and well tolerated, with no significant safety issues.

Individually Tailored Therapy for SPMS and PPMS

SPMS without exacerbations is often considered a nonmodifiable disease state. It is a phase of MS considered to consist of neurodegeneration with axonal loss and cortical and spinal cord atrophy. However, there are a few ongoing trials for SPMS. One involves the intravenous administration of a synthetic peptide, MBP8298, for SPMS patients with HLA haplotypes DR2 and/or DR4. MAESTRO-01 is a multicenter, multinational clinical trial in which over 600 patients have been enrolled.[9] An interim safety analysis of the first 508 patients, on a blinded basis, showed no significant safety concerns. An interim analysis of the first 200 patients at 2 years is expected in the third quarter of 2008. MAESTRO-03 is currently enrolling in the United States for SPMS patients without exacerbations to receive 500 mg MBP8298 or sterile water as placebo IV every 6 months.

Rituximab (RTX) is a monoclonal antibody that specifically targets CD20+ B cells. There may be a pathogenic role of B cells in MS, particularly in PPMS. In an ongoing placebo-controlled study, 439 patients with PPMS by the McDonald Criteria with greater than 1 year duration of disease, an EDSS score of 2-6.5, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) showing elevated IgG or oligoclonal bands in the past 24 months were randomized in a 2:1 manner to receive 1000 mg RTX twice every 24 weeks over 96 weeks (4 courses) or placebo.[10] The patients are to be followed to 122 weeks with magnetic resonance imaging at -2, 0, 6, 48, 96, and 122 weeks. Primary endpoint is a 1-point increase in the EDSS sustained for at least 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes are change in baseline to week 96, T2 lesion volume, and brain volume. Results of enrollment are that 50.3% of the 439 patients are female with a mean age of 50.4 years; 56% had a baseline EDSS greater than 4 with a mean EDSS of 4.03. Sixty-five percent of patients had never had a disease-modifying treatment. At randomization, there was a mean Gd+ lesion of 0.7 with 75.2% with no new lesions, but 24.8% had greater than 1 Gd+ lesion. These are pooled demographic data from an ongoing blinded study. With nearly 25% of patients with baseline Gd+ lesions and all patients with active CSF due to inclusion criteria, an enrichment for active disease in this trial is suggested. This is consistent with active immunologic activity in this patient population and may increase the possibility for a therapeutic effect of RTX.

Neuromyelitis Optica Treatment Options

Neuromyelitis optica (NMO; called spinal-optical MS in Asia and also called Devic's disease) is a serious, inflammatory, demyelinating disease of the optic nerves and spinal cord. Many patients fail to respond to steroid therapy or other standard treatments, including chemotherapy, for MS. Five-year survival may be less than 80%. Dr. Khatri[11] presented a series of 6 NMO patients who had failed high-dose methylprednisolone and prednisone treatment with plasma exchange (PE). All patients met diagnostic criteria for NMO and were serum NMO-IgG antibody positive. Three patients were white and 3 were African American (age range, 34-53; mean 40). All were female. EDSS ranged from 2 to 8.5 (mean 6.3). Following PE, all patients improved and stabilized (EDSS mean improved from 6.3 to 5.1). Four patients continue to receive PE (1 patient for the past 16 years). The frequency of maintenance PE varied from once a month to every 3 months. Because of insurance problems, 2 of the 4 patients had to stop PE for several months. This resulted in both patients becoming blind and bedridden, despite treatment with high-dose methylprednisolone and cyclophosphamide. When PE was restarted, there was dramatic improvement, although not to the prior functional state before it was stopped. The conclusion is that PE can be effective even on a long-term basis for some NMO patients refractory to other treatments.

Symptomatic Therapy

Fampridine-SR (a sustained-release form of 4-aminopyridine) can be useful in improving central conduction of demyelinated axons in the central nervous system (CNS) by closing potassium channels. Clinically, it has been shown in phase 2 and phase 3 trials to improve pyramidal tract function as measured by the timed 25-foot walk. A meta-analysis of a phase 2 and a phase 3 fampridine trial was presented in a platform presentation discussing the results of the trials, the efficacy assessments, and the clinical validity of outcome measures in the 2 trials. Both were double-blind, placebo-controlled, 14-week studies of MS patients with ambulatory deficits.[12] A total of 501 patients were included in the analysis, with a randomization ratio of 3:1 (drug:placebo). The results showed a significant improvement in ambulation for fampridine-treated patients over placebo (P = .001). The primary efficacy measurement was that of a "timed walk responder," which was a patient whose walking speeds for at least 3 of 4 treatment visits were faster than the fastest speed of any of the 4 pretreatment visits and one follow-up visit. Clinical impact was assessed with the 12-item Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale, with significant improvement of fampridine over placebo patients (P = .001). Patient satisfaction was also high on both studies, with the Subject Global Impression score significantly better for fampridine treatment vs placebo (P = .001)

Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) has been popular among some MS patients as an alternative therapy. Naltrexone has long been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as an orally administered treatment for heroin addiction. It is a semisynthetic opiate antagonist approved for use in a 50-mg dose. It has been used for the symptomatic treatment of pain, spasticity, and fatigue. In a study supported by the Italian Federation of Multiple Sclerosis, data supporting some benefit of LDN in PPMS patients were presented.[13] Prior evidence has shown that when naltrexone is given at very low doses (5 mg), an upregulation of endorphins results and no opiate antagonism occurs. In 40 PPMS patients treated with LDN in an open-label manner as a pilot study for safety, LDN has been safe so far. Transient liver function test elevation, mild agitation, and sleep disturbance have occurred as the main side effects. Only 2 dropouts have occurred, 1 for protocol violation and 1 for severely increased hypertonia. Efficacy results are pending, but patients reporting a sense of well-being may have a neurochemical basis for that effect.

Ethics of Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

Dr. Chris Polman discussed the ethics of placebo-controlled trials in the treatment of MS in a platform presentation on behalf of the National MS Society International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in MS, which met in Washington, DC in March 2007.[14] This committee updated the prior recommendation of the International Advisory Committee that had been published in 2001.[15] The recommendations of the current Committee are in context of the newly available treatment since 2001. The prior recommendations basically said that placebo-controlled trials were allowable "if certain conditions were met." These conditions have been expanded and are more restrictive. The current Committee recommendations for placebo-controlled trials to be ethical are: (1) if there is no existing effective therapy (EET) for their type of MS (such as for PPMS or most SPMS); (2) if the patient refuses treatment (such as with injectable medications); (3) if no EET has been effective for their type of MS (more than 1 adequate trial for each class of medication) or intolerable side-effects have occurred; (4) the patient must be well informed not only through the informed consent (IC) process but there also should be a patient advocate present; (5) there should be a separation between the treating neurologist and research neurologist; (6) the IC process should be repeated throughout the clinical trial to be sure that the patient is aware of all other treatment options; and (7) in areas that are "resource-restricted," the trial drug must be available to the subjects after the trial has been completed.

Supported by an independent educational grant from Genentech

References

Cook S. Combined analysis of the safety and tolerability of cladribine from four randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials in patients with multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S244-245 (abstract).
Cook S. Safety profile of cladribine following repeat treatment: a combined analysis of data from five clinical trials in patients with multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S245 (abstract).
Giovannoni G, Comi G, Cook S, et al. The CLARITY study (CLAdRIbine tablets Treating multiple sclerosis orallY): design of a phase III trial of oral cladribine in relapsing multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S245 (abstract).
Montalban X, Cohen BA, Jeffery DR, et al. Oral cladribine added to interferon beta-1a for active multiple sclerosis: a 96-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIb study. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S245-246 (abstract).
Gold R, Fox R, Dawson K, et al. Two phase 3 studies to determine the efficacy and safety of BG00012, a novel, oral fumaric acid derivative, in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S173 (abstract).
Coles AJ; on behalf of the CAMMS223 Study Group. Alemtuzumab improved multiple sclerosis functional composite scores and delayed time to first relapse at 2-year interim analysis compared to subcutaneous interferon beta-1a. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S166 (abstract).
Fox E, Mayer L, Sullivan H, et al. Two-year results with alemtuzumab in patients with active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis who have failed licensed beta interferon therapies. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S166-167 (abstract).
Montalban X, Wynn D, Kaufman et al. Preliminary CHOICE results: a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre study of subcutaneous daclizumab in patients with active, relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis on interferon beta. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S18 (abstract).
Arfors L; on behalf of the MAESTRO-01 Investigators Group. Safety observations from administration of MBP8298 as part of the ongoing phase 3 MAESTRO-01 SPMS clinical trial. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S171-172 (abstract).
Hawker K, Freedman MS, O'Connor P, et al. Rituximab in patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis: demographics in a phase II/III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre trial. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S165 (abstract).
Khatri B, Kramer J, Dukic M, Palencia M. Sustained long-term improvement with plasma exchange in patients with recurrent neuromyelitis optica unresponsive to corticosteroids. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S173 (abstract).
Goodman AD, Brown TR, Cohen JA, et al. Meta-analysis of phase 2 and 3 fampridine trials in multiple sclerosis: efficacy assessment and validation of clinical meaningfulness of outcome measure. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S33 (abstract).
Gironi M, Boneschi FM, Solaro C, et al. Pilot multicenter study of low dose naltrexone in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S176 (abstract).
Polman CH; on behalf of the National MS Society International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials. A reconsideration of the ethics of placebo-controlled clinical trials in MS: outcomes of an international conference. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S17 (abstract).
Lublin FD, Reingold SC. Placebo-controlled clinical trials in multiple sclerosis: ethical considerations. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (USA) Task Force on Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials in MS. Ann Neurol. 2001;49:677-681.

Exploring the Pathogenesis of MS and the Rationale for Current Treatments
Discussion of Key Cellular Players and Important Immune Responses

Dr. David Hafler presented a platform discussion reviewing the current and emerging understanding of the genetic basis of multiple sclerosis (MS).[1] Persons with a first-degree relative are known to be at higher risk than the average person. The prevalence of MS is 0.1% in the general population, 2% to 4% in siblings, 5% in dizygotic twins, and 30% in monozygotic twins. MS may be considered a complex genetic disease involving many genomic expressions. It has been known for over 30 years that there is a major histocompatibility complex (MHC) on chromosome 6p21. It is also known that MS is a disease that involves the dysfunction of the CD4+CD25 high regulatory T-cell function.

In order to further elucidate the genetic basis of MS, a collaborative effort of US and UK researchers used a staged approach to identify risk alleles associated with MS. The first stage involved whole genomic association scans using the Affymetrix 500,000 SNP (single nucleotide polymorphisms) GeneChip (Santa Clara, California) to analyze DNA from 931 trio families (an MS patient and both parents). The second stage involved further analysis of the most frequently appearing SNPs. Further analysis identified the 2 most prevalent SNPs, IL2RA and IL7R. Although IL2RA has been identified in both patients with MS and patients with diabetes, it is likely that different variants are associated with each of these diseases because the risk for MS and DM do not coexist. Although there may be different variants of the same gene for IL2RA, this may open up a new area for genetic typing in MS, which could lead to specific therapeutic choices for patients who may be more likely to respond to one type of treatment vs another. Genetic screening is currently being used in the MAESTRO-03 study. Data from the MAESTRO-1 study showed that patients with DR2 or DR4 haplotypes were likely to respond to treatment in secondary progressive MS (SPMS), while MS patients with other markers did not, so one of the inclusion criteria in the MAESTRO-3 study is a blood test on the screening visit. The patient must be DR2 or DR4 positive to be in the study.

In a platform presentation following Dr. Hafler's presentation, Dr. Howard Weiner discussed circulating markers that have been found to differ between relapsing remitting MS (RRMS) and SPMS.[2] The central question regarding MS treatment is whether early and aggressive immunotherapy will prevent the conversion to SPMS in the majority of patients. The specific identification of antibody patterns in MS may help achieve that goal because it is known that inflammatory antibodies are linked to brain pathology. The progression of RRMS to SPMS is likely to be due to neuronal degeneration triggered by inflammation.

Dendritic cells (DCs) are antigenic cells of the innate immune system that have the unique ability to induce primary immune responses. Circulating myeloid DCs were isolated from blood samples to determine if there were abnormalities in patients with MS and if myeloid DCs were related to disease stage. SPMS patients were found to have a greater percentage of myeloid DCs expressing CD80, IL-12, and TNF-alpha while having a lower percentage of PD-L1 compared with patients with RRMS or controls. A higher percentage of RRMS patients had DCs producing greater amounts of Th1 (IFN-alfa and TNF-alpha) and Th2 (IL-4, IL-13) compared with controls and SPMS patients. These results may be interpreted as showing that there is a loss of an inflammatory component in the immune system when MS patients transition from RRMS to SPMS. This may explain, in part, an immunologic basis for the different stages and clinical patterns of MS.

In a comparison of the treatment effects of FTY720 (a new oral treatment in human trials for MS), IFN-beta, and glatiramer acetate (GA) on experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), each of the 3 compounds were given to Lewis rats in a model of progressive EAE.[3] For decades, EAE has been the experimental model for MS. FTY720 was administered at 3 mg/kg orally. At this dose, the onset of acute EAE was inhibited, and when given after recovery from an acute attack in an untreated animal, FTY720 inhibited further relapses. When FTY720 was given at a dose of 6 mg/kg orally during an acute exacerbation, the progressive phase of EAE was inhibited. GA failed to prevent the progressive phase at doses of 10 mg/kg orally or 5 mg/kg subcutaneously. GA at doses of 15 mg/kg orally or 10 gm/kg subcutaneously failed to prevent the onset or severity of relapses of EAE. IFN-beta given at 10,000 U intraperitoneally 3 times weekly failed to prevent the progressive phase of EAE.

Cerebrospinal Fluid Analysis in Clinically Isolated Syndromes

Clinically isolated syndromes (CIS) have been extensively evaluated by clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) criteria for risk to develop clinically definite MS (CDMS). The clinical diagnostic value of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis was presented from 104 patients presenting with a first clinical episode consistent with a demyelinating disease of the central nervous system.[4] A diagnosis of either CIS or possible MS was made. The patients underwent neurologic evaluation, brain MRI, and CSF analysis and were followed from 2 to 6 years as to their course and final diagnosis according to the McDonald criteria. The results of the CSF evaluation showed a significant difference between the possible MS patients and CIS patients, with 82% of the possible MS patients having positive CSF for oligoclonal bands (IgGOB) while 18% of CIS patients had positive CSF for IgGOB. The conclusions of the authors were that "positive CSF" should be considered among the criteria of dissemination in time of lesions in MS.

Rating Scales

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a noninvasive and relatively inexpensive way to measure the retinal fiber layer. Dr. Siger and colleagues[5] presented data showing that by measuring the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), the most proximal part of the optic nerve, a measure of axonal degeneration can be obtained. Fifty-one patients underwent OCT with RNFL measurements, 20 with optic neuritis (ON) and MS, 31 with MS and without ON, and 12 healthy controls. T2- and T1-weighted imaging lesion volume, T1/T2 ratio, and brain atrophy were analyzed and correlated with OCT. RNFL was also correlated with disease duration and neurologic status. The results showed that RNFL was significantly reduced compared with controls in the affected eye (ON) but not significantly different when compared with the unaffected eye. Reduction of RFNL was correlated with MRI measures of brain atrophy (P = .01) and increased T1 lesion (black holes) volume (P = .03). RNFL reduction also correlated with clinical data (Expanded Disability Status Scale: P = .004).

Supported by an independent educational grant from Genentech

References

Moreau R, Kazaz E, Clerc L, et al. Prevalence of multiple sclerosis in France and its 22 regions. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S103 (abstract).
Osoegawa M, Fukazawa T, Fujihara K, et al. Temporal and geographical changes of multiple sclerosis phenotype in Japanese: nationwide survey results over 30 years. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S101-102 (abstract).
Houzen H, Niino M, Kikuchi S, et al. Increasing risk of multiple sclerosis in Japan. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S102 (abstract).
Chin P, Laouri M, Broder M, et al. Healthcare utilization among insured multiple sclerosis patients in the U.S. from 2005-2006. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S261 (abstract).
Siger M, Dziegielewski K, Jasek L, et al. Optical coherence tomography in multiple sclerosis as a measure of brain atrophy. Multiple Sclerosis. 2007;13(suppl 2):S86 (abstract).


Authors and Disclosures

As an organization accredited by the ACCME, Medscape, LLC requires everyone who is in a position to control the content of an education activity to disclose all relevant financial relationships with any commercial interest. The ACCME defines "relevant financial relationships" as financial relationships in any amount, occurring within the past 12 months, including financial relationships of a spouse or life partner, that could create a conflict of interest.

Medscape, LLC encourages Authors to identify investigational products or off-label uses of products regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration, at first mention and where appropriate in the content.

Author

Keith R. Edwards, MD

Assistant Clinical Professor of Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Consulting Neurologist, Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts

Disclosure: Keith R. Edwards, MD, has disclosed that he has served as an advisor or consultant to Allergan Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, and Serono.
Editor

Iwona Misiuta, PhD, MHA

Scientific Director, Medscape LLC, New York, NY

Disclosure: Iwona Misiuta, PhD, MHA, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
Stephanie Kushner, PhD

Scientific Director, Medscape LLC, New York, NY

Disclosure: Stephanie Kushner, PhD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.