umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rituximab versus Fingolimod after Natalizumab in Multiple Sclerosis Patients
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Neuroscience, Clinical Neuroscience.
Show others and affiliations
2016 (English)In: Annals of Neurology, ISSN 0364-5134, E-ISSN 1531-8249, Vol. 79, no 6, 950-958 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Resource type
Text
Abstract [en]

Objective: Many JC virus antibody-positive relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients who are stable on natalizumab switch to other therapies to avoid progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

Methods: We compared outcomes for all RRMS patients switching from natalizumab due to JC virus antibody positivity at 3 Swedish multiple sclerosis centers with different preferential use of rituximab and fingolimod (Stockholm, n = 156, fingolimod 51%; Gothenburg, n = 64, fingolimod 88%; Umea, n = 36, fingolimod 19%), yielding a total cohort of N = 256 (fingolimod 55%).

Results: Within 1.5 years of cessation of natalizumab, 1.8% (rituximab) and 17.6% (fingolimod) of patients experienced a clinical relapse (hazard ratio for rituximab = 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02-0.43). The hazard ratio (favoring rituximab) for adverse events (5.3% vs 21.1%) and treatment discontinuation (1.8% vs 28.2%) were 0.25 (95% CI = 0.10-0.59) and 0.07 (95% CI = 0.02-0.30), respectively. Furthermore, contrast-enhancing lesions were found in 1.4% (rituximab) versus 24.2% (fingolimod) of magnetic resonance imaging examinations (odds ratio = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.00-0.22). Differences remained when adjusting for possible confounders (age, sex, disability status, time on natalizumab, washout time, follow-up time, and study center).

Interpretation: Our findings suggest an improved effectiveness and tolerability of rituximab compared with fingolimod in stable RRMS patients who switch from natalizumab due to JC virus antibody positivity. Although residual confounding factors cannot be ruled out, the shared reason for switching from natalizumab and the preferential use of either rituximab or fingolimod in 2 of the centers mitigates these concerns.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 79, no 6, 950-958 p.
National Category
Neurology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-122546DOI: 10.1002/ana.24651ISI: 000376775400009PubMedID: 27038238OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-122546DiVA: diva2:949979
Available from: 2016-07-26 Created: 2016-06-20 Last updated: 2017-05-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Salzer, JonatanMalmeström, ClasSvenningsson, Anders
By organisation
Clinical Neuroscience
In the same journal
Annals of Neurology
Neurology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 122 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf