Aggressive multiple sclerosis: a single‐centre, real‐world treatment experience with autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation and alemtuzumab

• Published in: European journal of neurology Vol. 27; no. 10; pp. 2047 - 2055
• Main Authors: Boffa, G., Lapucci, C., Sbragia, E., Varaldo, R., Raiola, A. M., Currò, D., Roccatagliata, L., Capello, E., Laroni, A., Mikulska, M., Gualandi, F., Uccelli, A., Angelucci, E., Mancardi, G. L., Inglese, M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.10.2020
• Subjects: aggressive multiple sclerosis; treatment; alemtuzumab; Autografts; autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation; Confidence intervals; Disease control; Gadolinium; Hematopoietic stem cells; Immunotherapy; Magnetic resonance imaging; Medical treatment; Monoclonal antibodies; Multiple sclerosis; Stem cell transplantation; Stem cells; Survival; Transplantation; alemtuzumab; aggressive multiple sclerosis; treatment; autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation
• ISSN: 1351-5101; 1468-1331
• DOI: 10.1111/ene.14324

Background and purpose The best therapeutic approach for aggressive relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis remains unknown. The objective was to compare the efficacy and safety of autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) and alemtuzumab in aggressive relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Methods The time to first relapse, time to confirmed disability worsening, time to first evidence of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity and time to first evidence of disease activity were compared between the two treatment groups. Secondary outcomes included the 12, 24 and 36 month annualized relapse rate (ARR) and the 6‐month confirmed Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) changes at months 12 and 24. Results Fifty‐seven patients treated with aHSCT (n = 25) or alemtuzumab (n = 32) were included. At baseline, aHSCT patients had a higher EDSS (median score 6 vs. 3; P < 0.001), higher ARR (mean ARR 3.2 vs. 1.7; P = 0.001) and a higher number of baseline T1 gadolinium‐enhancing lesions on MRI (mean number 15.5 vs. 1.6; P < 0.001). NEDA‐3 (no evidence of disease activity) status was more frequently achieved in aHSCT‐treated patients than in alemtuzumab‐treated patients [75% vs. 56% of patients at the end of the observation period; hazard ratio (HR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08–0.84; P = 0.023]. aHSCT significantly reduced the risk of relapse (relapse‐free survival 84% vs. 69%; HR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02–0.63; P = 0.012) and MRI activity (MRI‐activity‐free survival 85% vs. 59%; HR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03–0.59; P = 0.009). The ARR at 36 months was significantly lower in the aHSCT group (0.05 vs. 0.35, P = 0.02). A significant effect of aHSCT in promoting EDSS improvement compared with alemtuzumab was noted (P = 0.035). Conclusions Alemtuzumab and aHSCT are effective treatment choices for aggressive multiple sclerosis. aHSCT seems to be superior to alemtuzumab in inducing complete disease control and in promoting short‐term disability improvement.