New possibilities of siponimod therapy in patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis
https://doi.org/10.14412/2074-2711-2021-1-138-144
Abstract
The process of neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis (MS) remains an urgent problem of modern neurology; from the point of view of its therapy, it is especially important to identify this condition during the transition to secondary progression. This paper reflects the opinion of the Council of Leading MS Experts on the early detection of secondary progressive MS and its diagnostic tools, including the use of new online questionnaires. Special attention is paid to the concept of clinical progression verification using the indicator of the confirmed progression of disability and to the prospect for introducing siponimod (Kiendra® ) into clinical practice for the treatment of patients with secondary progressive MS.
Keywords
multiple sclerosis,
secondary progressive multiple sclerosis,
neurodegeneration,
council of experts,
siponimod
Supporting agencies: This article has been supported Novartis.
About the Authors
D. S. Kasatkin
Yaroslavl State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
5, Revolutsionnaya St., Yaroslavl 150000
Russian Federation
5, Revolutsionnaya St., Yaroslavl 150000
N. V. Khachanova
N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
1, Ostrovityanov St., Moscow 117997
Russian Federation
1, Ostrovityanov St., Moscow 117997
V. M. Alifirova
Siberian State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
2, Moskovsky High Road, Tomsk 634050
Russian Federation
2, Moskovsky High Road, Tomsk 634050
A. N. Boyko
N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia; Federal Center of Brain and Neurotechnologies, Federal Biomedical Agency of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
1, Ostrovityanov St., Moscow 117997
Department of Neuroimmunology
K. Z. Bakhtiyarova
Bashkir State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
3; Lenin St., Ufa 450008
Russian Federation
3; Lenin St., Ufa 450008
Ya. V. Vlasov
Samara State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia
Russian Federation
89, Chapaevskaya St., Samara 443099
Russian Federation
89, Chapaevskaya St., Samara 443099
M. V. Davydovskaya
N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia; Research and Practical Center for Clinical and Economic Analysis, Ministry of Health of the Moscow Region
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
1, Ostrovityanov St., Moscow 117997
4, Karbyshev St., Liter a, Krasnogorsk, Moscow Region 143033
E. P. Evdoshenko
City Clinical Hospital Thirty-One
Russian Federation
City Center for Multiple Sclerosis
3, Dynamo Pr., Saint Petersburg 197110
Russian Federation
City Center for Multiple Sclerosis
3, Dynamo Pr., Saint Petersburg 197110
S. A. Sivertseva
AO «Neftyanik» Primary Healthcare Unit, Tyumen Regional Center for Multiple Sclerosis
Russian Federation
12, Schiller St., Tyumen 625048
Russian Federation
12, Schiller St., Tyumen 625048
References
1. Ziemssen T, Derfuss T, de Stefano N, et al. Optimizing treatment success in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol. 2016 Jun;263(6):1053-65. doi: 10.1007/s00415-015-7986-y. Epub 2015 Dec 24.
2. Oh J, Alikhani K, Bruno T, et al. Diagnosis and management of secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis: time for change. Neurodegener Dis Manag. 2019 Dec;9(6):301-17. doi: 10.2217/nmt-2019-0024. Epub 2019 Nov 26.
3. Bsteh G, Ehling R, Lutterotti A, et al. Long Term Clinical Prognostic Factors in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: Insights from a 10-Year Observational Study. PLoS One. 2016 Jul 8;11(7):e0158978. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158978
4. Kasatkin DS, Molchanova SS, Spirin NN. Early cognitive dysfunction as a marker for the poor course of multiple sclerosis: a prospective 12-year follow-up. Nevrologiya, neiropsikhiatriya, psikhosomatika = Neurology, Neuropsychiatry, Psychosomatics. 2019;11(3):47-51. doi: 10.14412/2074-27112019-3-47-51 (In Russ.).
5. Amur S, LaVange L, Zineh I, et al. Biomarker Qualification: Toward a Multiple Stakeholder Framework for Biomarker Development, Regulatory Acceptance, and Utilization. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2015 Jul;98(1):34-46. doi: 10.1002/cpt.136
6. Ontaneda D, Cohen JA, Amato MP. Clinical outcome measures for progressive MS trials. Mult Scler. 2017 Oct;23(12):1627-35. doi: 10.1177/1352458517729465
7. Motl RW, Cohen JA, Benedict R, et al; Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessments Consortium. Validity of the timed 25-foot walk as an ambulatory performance outcome measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2017 Apr;23(5):704-10. doi: 10.1177/1352458517690823
8. Feys P, Lamers I, Francis G, et al. Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessments Consortium. The Nine-Hole Peg Test as a manual dexterity performance measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2017 Apr;23(5):711-20. doi: 10.1177/1352458517690824
9. Learmonth YC, Dlugonski DD, Pilutti LA, et al. The reliability, precision and clinically meaningful change of walking assessments in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2013 Nov;19(13):1784-91. doi: 10.1177/1352458513483890. Epub 2013 Apr 15.
10. Benedict RH, DeLuca J, Phillips G, et al; Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessments Consortium. Validity of the Symbol Digit Modalities Test as a cognition performance outcome measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2017 Apr;23(5):721-33. doi: 10.1177/1352458517690821
11. Balcer LJ, Raynowska J, Nolan R, et al; Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessments Consortium. Validity of low-contrast letter acuity as a visual performance outcome measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2017 Apr;23(5):734-47. doi: 10.1177/1352458517690822
12. Volkov AI, Popova EV. New tools for early detection of multiple sclerosis progression: MSProDiscuss Questionnaire. Zhurnal nevrologii i psikhiatrii im. S.S. Korsakova. 2020;120(7 Is. 2):43-7. doi: 10.17116/jnevro202012007243 (In Russ.).
13. Ziemssen T, Piani-Meier D, Bennett B, et al. A Physician-Completed Digital Tool for Evaluating Disease Progression (Multiple Sclerosis Progression Discussion Tool): Validation Study. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(2):e16932. doi: 10.2196/16932
14. Katz Sand I, Krieger S, Farrell C, Miller AE. Diagnostic uncertainty during the transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2014 Oct;20(12):1654-7. doi: 10.1177/1352458514521517. Epub 2014 Feb 3.
15. Draft clinical practice guidelines for multiple sclerosis. Available from: https://www.centrems.com/downloads/Clinical_recommendations_of_the_RS-Project_submitted_to_the_MHRF.pdf (accessed 31.12.2020) (In Russ.).
16. Lorscheider J, Buzzard K, Jokubaitis V, et al; MSBase Study Group. Defining secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Brain. 2016 Sep;139(Pt 9):2395-405. doi: 10.1093/brain/aww173. Epub 2016 Jul 7.
17. Kappos L, Bar-Or A, Cree BAC, et al; EXPAND Clinical Investigators. Siponimod versus placebo in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (EXPAND): A double-blind, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet. 2018 Mar 31;391(10127):1263-73. doi: 10.1016/S01406736(18)30475-6
18. Kalincik T, Cutter G, Spelman T, et al. Defining reliable disability outcomes in multiple sclerosis. Brain. 2015 Nov;138(Pt 11):3287-98. doi: 10.1093/brain/awv258. Epub 2015 Sep 10.
19. European Medicines agency: Guideline onclinical investigation of medicinal products forthe treatment of Multiple Sclerosis Committeefor Medicinal Products for Human Use. EMA/CHMP/771815/2011, Rev. 2; 2015. Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-clinical-investigation-medicinal-products-treatment-multiplesclerosis_en-0.pdf
20. Riester K, Kappos L, Selmaj K, et al. Impact of informative censoring on the treatment effect estimate of disability worsening in multiple sclerosis clinical trials. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019 Nov 23;39:101865. doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2019.101865
21. Kappos L, Wolinsky JS, Giovannoni G, et al. Contribution of Relapse-Independent Progression vs Relapse-Associated Worsening to Overall Confirmed Disability Accumulation in Typical Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis in a Pooled Analysis of 2 Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Neurol. 2020 Sep 1;77(9):1132-40. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.1568
22. Kappos L, Weinshenker B, Pozzilli C, et al; European (EU-SPMS) Interferon beta-1b in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis Trial Steering Committee and Independent Advisory Board; North American (NA-SPMS) Interferon beta-1b in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis Trial Steering Committee and Independent Advisory Board. Interferon beta-1b in secondary progressive MS: a combined analysis of the two trials. Neurology. 2004;63(10):1779-87 doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000145561.08973.4f
23. Samjoo IA, Worthington E, Haltner A, et al. Matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison of siponimod and other disease modifying treatments in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2020 Jul;36(7):1157-66. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2020.1747999
24. Giovannoni G. Long-term reduction of relapse rate and confirmed disability progression after 6 years of ocrelizumab treatment in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. ECTRIMS Online Library. 09/12/19; 278217; P1015.
25. Neuberger EE, Abbass IM, Jones E, Engmann NJ. Work Productivity Outcomes Associated with Ocrelizumab Compared with Other Disease-Modifying Therapies for Multiple Sclerosis. Neurol Ther. 2020 Nov 26. doi: 10.1007/s40120-020-00224-1
26. Turner B, Cree BAC, Kappos L, et al. Ocrelizumab efficacy in subgroups of patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. J Neurol. 2019 May;266(5):1182-93. doi: 10.1007/s00415-01909248-6. Epub 2019 Feb 28.
27. Hartung HP, Gonsette R, König N, et al; Mitoxantrone in Multiple Sclerosis Study Group (MIMS). Mitoxantrone in progressive multiple sclerosis: a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2002 Dec 21-28;360(9350):2018-25. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)12023-X
28. Martinelli Boneschi F, Vacchi L, Rovaris M, et al. Mitoxantrone for multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 May 31;(5):CD002127. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002127.pub3
29. Marriott JJ, Miyasaki JM, Gronseth G, O'Connor PW; Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Evidence Report: The efficacy and safety of mitoxantrone (Novantrone) in the treatment of multiple sclerosis: Report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2010 May 4;74(18):1463-70. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181dc1ae0
30. Evdoshenko EP, Neofidov NA, Bakhtiyarova KZ, et al. Efficacy and safety of syponimode in patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis in the Russian population. Zhurnal nevrologii i psikhiatrii im. S.S. Korsakova. 2019;119(10 Iss. 2):111-20. doi: 10.17116/jnevro2019119102111 (In Russ.).
31. Instructions for the medical use of Kiendra® . Available from: https://grls.rosminzdrav.ru/Grls_View_v2.aspx?routingGuid=56d76c7b-756f-4152-8474-41fe1663c915&t= (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Kasatkin D.S., Khachanova N.V., Alifirova V.M., Boyko A.N., Bakhtiyarova K.Z., Vlasov Y.V., Davydovskaya M.V., Evdoshenko E.P., Sivertseva S.A. New possibilities of siponimod therapy in patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Neurology, Neuropsychiatry, Psychosomatics. 2021;13(1):138-144. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.14412/2074-2711-2021-1-138-144
Views: 692
Email this article 