Cargando…

Double-Blind Controlled Randomized Trial of Cyclophosphamide versus Methylprednisolone in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic options are limited in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). Open-label studies suggested efficacy of monthly IV cyclophosphamide (CPM) without induction for delaying progression but no randomized trial was conducted so far. OBJECTIVE: To compare CPM to methylpredn...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brochet, Bruno, Deloire, Mathilde S. A., Perez, Paul, Loock, Timothé, Baschet, Louise, Debouverie, Marc, Pittion, Sophie, Ouallet, Jean-Christophe, Clavelou, Pierre, de Sèze, Jérôme, Collongues, Nicolas, Vermersch, Patrick, Zéphir, Hélène, Castelnovo, Giovanni, Labauge, Pierre, Lebrun, Christine, Cohen, Mikael, Ruet, Aurélie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5207788/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28045953
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168834
_version_ 1782490435201007616
author Brochet, Bruno
Deloire, Mathilde S. A.
Perez, Paul
Loock, Timothé
Baschet, Louise
Debouverie, Marc
Pittion, Sophie
Ouallet, Jean-Christophe
Clavelou, Pierre
de Sèze, Jérôme
Collongues, Nicolas
Vermersch, Patrick
Zéphir, Hélène
Castelnovo, Giovanni
Labauge, Pierre
Lebrun, Christine
Cohen, Mikael
Ruet, Aurélie
author_facet Brochet, Bruno
Deloire, Mathilde S. A.
Perez, Paul
Loock, Timothé
Baschet, Louise
Debouverie, Marc
Pittion, Sophie
Ouallet, Jean-Christophe
Clavelou, Pierre
de Sèze, Jérôme
Collongues, Nicolas
Vermersch, Patrick
Zéphir, Hélène
Castelnovo, Giovanni
Labauge, Pierre
Lebrun, Christine
Cohen, Mikael
Ruet, Aurélie
author_sort Brochet, Bruno
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Therapeutic options are limited in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). Open-label studies suggested efficacy of monthly IV cyclophosphamide (CPM) without induction for delaying progression but no randomized trial was conducted so far. OBJECTIVE: To compare CPM to methylprednisolone (MP) in SPMS. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind clinical trial on two parallel groups. Patient with SPMS, with a documented worsening of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score during the last year and an EDSS score between 4·0 and 6·5 were recruited and received one intravenous infusion of treatment (CPM: 750 mg /m(2) body surface area—MP: 1g) every four weeks for one year, and every eight weeks for the second year. The primary endpoint was the time to EDSS deterioration, when confirmed sixteen weeks later, analyzed using a Cox model. RESULTS: Due to recruitment difficulties, the study was terminated prematurely after 138 patients were included (CPM, n = 72; MP, n = 66). In the CPM group, 33 patients stopped treatment prematurely, mainly due to tolerability, compared with 22 in the MP group. Primary endpoint: the hazard ratio for EDSS deterioration in the CPM in comparison with the MP group was 0.61 [95% CI: 0·31–1·22](p = 0·16). According to the secondary multistate model analysis, patients in the CPM group were 2.2 times more likely ([1·14–4.29]; p = 0.02) to discontinue treatment than those in the MP group and 2.7 times less likely (HR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.17–0.84; p = 0.02) to experience disability progression when they did not stop treatment prematurely. Safety profile was as expected. CONCLUSION: Although the primary end-point was negative, secondary analysis suggested that CPM decreases the risk of progression in SPMS, but its use may be limited by low tolerability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00241254
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5207788
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52077882017-01-19 Double-Blind Controlled Randomized Trial of Cyclophosphamide versus Methylprednisolone in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis Brochet, Bruno Deloire, Mathilde S. A. Perez, Paul Loock, Timothé Baschet, Louise Debouverie, Marc Pittion, Sophie Ouallet, Jean-Christophe Clavelou, Pierre de Sèze, Jérôme Collongues, Nicolas Vermersch, Patrick Zéphir, Hélène Castelnovo, Giovanni Labauge, Pierre Lebrun, Christine Cohen, Mikael Ruet, Aurélie PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Therapeutic options are limited in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). Open-label studies suggested efficacy of monthly IV cyclophosphamide (CPM) without induction for delaying progression but no randomized trial was conducted so far. OBJECTIVE: To compare CPM to methylprednisolone (MP) in SPMS. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind clinical trial on two parallel groups. Patient with SPMS, with a documented worsening of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score during the last year and an EDSS score between 4·0 and 6·5 were recruited and received one intravenous infusion of treatment (CPM: 750 mg /m(2) body surface area—MP: 1g) every four weeks for one year, and every eight weeks for the second year. The primary endpoint was the time to EDSS deterioration, when confirmed sixteen weeks later, analyzed using a Cox model. RESULTS: Due to recruitment difficulties, the study was terminated prematurely after 138 patients were included (CPM, n = 72; MP, n = 66). In the CPM group, 33 patients stopped treatment prematurely, mainly due to tolerability, compared with 22 in the MP group. Primary endpoint: the hazard ratio for EDSS deterioration in the CPM in comparison with the MP group was 0.61 [95% CI: 0·31–1·22](p = 0·16). According to the secondary multistate model analysis, patients in the CPM group were 2.2 times more likely ([1·14–4.29]; p = 0.02) to discontinue treatment than those in the MP group and 2.7 times less likely (HR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.17–0.84; p = 0.02) to experience disability progression when they did not stop treatment prematurely. Safety profile was as expected. CONCLUSION: Although the primary end-point was negative, secondary analysis suggested that CPM decreases the risk of progression in SPMS, but its use may be limited by low tolerability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00241254 Public Library of Science 2017-01-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5207788/ /pubmed/28045953 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168834 Text en © 2017 Brochet et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Brochet, Bruno
Deloire, Mathilde S. A.
Perez, Paul
Loock, Timothé
Baschet, Louise
Debouverie, Marc
Pittion, Sophie
Ouallet, Jean-Christophe
Clavelou, Pierre
de Sèze, Jérôme
Collongues, Nicolas
Vermersch, Patrick
Zéphir, Hélène
Castelnovo, Giovanni
Labauge, Pierre
Lebrun, Christine
Cohen, Mikael
Ruet, Aurélie
Double-Blind Controlled Randomized Trial of Cyclophosphamide versus Methylprednisolone in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis
title Double-Blind Controlled Randomized Trial of Cyclophosphamide versus Methylprednisolone in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis
title_full Double-Blind Controlled Randomized Trial of Cyclophosphamide versus Methylprednisolone in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis
title_fullStr Double-Blind Controlled Randomized Trial of Cyclophosphamide versus Methylprednisolone in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis
title_full_unstemmed Double-Blind Controlled Randomized Trial of Cyclophosphamide versus Methylprednisolone in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis
title_short Double-Blind Controlled Randomized Trial of Cyclophosphamide versus Methylprednisolone in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis
title_sort double-blind controlled randomized trial of cyclophosphamide versus methylprednisolone in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5207788/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28045953
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168834
work_keys_str_mv AT brochetbruno doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT deloiremathildesa doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT perezpaul doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT loocktimothe doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT baschetlouise doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT debouveriemarc doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT pittionsophie doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT oualletjeanchristophe doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT claveloupierre doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT desezejerome doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT collonguesnicolas doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT vermerschpatrick doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT zephirhelene doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT castelnovogiovanni doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT labaugepierre doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT lebrunchristine doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT cohenmikael doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT ruetaurelie doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis
AT doubleblindcontrolledrandomizedtrialofcyclophosphamideversusmethylprednisoloneinsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis