Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2025
Efficacy of natalizumab in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: analysis of two phase III trials.
СтатьяКлиническое исследование III фазыРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dzau Winston, Roos Izanne, Kalincik Tomas
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The ASCEND trial did not find benefit of natalizumab during secondary progressive multiple sclerosis compared with placebo; however, its open-label extension suggests this may be obscured by therapeutic lag.We aimed to compare the efficacy of natalizumab and interferon β-1a in slowing disease progression in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis after accounting for therapeutic lag.
METHODS: We analysed pooled data from the ASCEND (natalizumab vs placebo) and SPECTRIMS (interferon β-1a vs placebo) trials. Cumulative hazards of 6-month confirmed disability progression during secondary progressive multiple sclerosis were compared using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for confounding variables. We accounted for therapeutic lag in each patient based on baseline expanded disability status scale, annualised relapse rate and sex. Differences between SPECTRIMS and ASCEND placebo arms were used to adjust the differences between interferon β-1a and natalizumab arms.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of 1156 patients were similar between SPECTRIMS and ASCEND cohorts, except for a higher proportion of older patients and lower relapse rates in the ASCEND trial. Natalizumab exhibited a lower cumulative hazard of disability progression compared with interferon β-1a (HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.29, p<0.0001). After adjusting for the difference in cumulative hazards between placebo groups (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.63, p=0.0004), natalizumab remained associated with a lower hazard of disability progression compared with interferon β-1a (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.77, p=0.0016).
CONCLUSION: After accounting for therapeutic lag and differences between ASCEND and SPECTRIMS trials, natalizumab, compared with interferon β-1a, reduces disability progression during secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.
METHODS: We analysed pooled data from the ASCEND (natalizumab vs placebo) and SPECTRIMS (interferon β-1a vs placebo) trials. Cumulative hazards of 6-month confirmed disability progression during secondary progressive multiple sclerosis were compared using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for confounding variables. We accounted for therapeutic lag in each patient based on baseline expanded disability status scale, annualised relapse rate and sex. Differences between SPECTRIMS and ASCEND placebo arms were used to adjust the differences between interferon β-1a and natalizumab arms.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of 1156 patients were similar between SPECTRIMS and ASCEND cohorts, except for a higher proportion of older patients and lower relapse rates in the ASCEND trial. Natalizumab exhibited a lower cumulative hazard of disability progression compared with interferon β-1a (HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.29, p<0.0001). After adjusting for the difference in cumulative hazards between placebo groups (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.63, p=0.0004), natalizumab remained associated with a lower hazard of disability progression compared with interferon β-1a (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.77, p=0.0016).
CONCLUSION: After accounting for therapeutic lag and differences between ASCEND and SPECTRIMS trials, natalizumab, compared with interferon β-1a, reduces disability progression during secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.