Cargando…

What Have Failed, Interrupted, and Withdrawn Antibody Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis Taught Us?

In the past two decades, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have revolutionized the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, a remarkable number of mAbs failed due to negative study results were withdrawn because of unexpected serious adverse events (SAEs) or due to studies being halted for other re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Krämer, Julia, Wiendl, Heinz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9294122/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35794296
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13311-022-01246-3
_version_ 1784749780170178560
author Krämer, Julia
Wiendl, Heinz
author_facet Krämer, Julia
Wiendl, Heinz
author_sort Krämer, Julia
collection PubMed
description In the past two decades, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have revolutionized the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, a remarkable number of mAbs failed due to negative study results were withdrawn because of unexpected serious adverse events (SAEs) or due to studies being halted for other reasons. While trials with positive outcomes are usually published in prestigious journals, negative trials are merely published as abstracts or not at all. This review summarizes MS mAbs that have either failed in phase II–III trials, have been interrupted for various reasons, or withdrawn from the market since 2015. The main conclusions that can be drawn from these 'negative' experiences are as follows. mAbs that have been proven to be safe in other autoimmune conditions, will not have the same safety profile in MS due to immunopathogenetic differences in these diseases (e.g., daclizumab). Identification of SAEs in clinical trials is difficult highlighting the importance of phase IV studies. Memory B cells are central players in MS immunopathogenesis (e.g., tabalumab). The pathophysiological mechanisms of disease progression are independent of leukocyte 'outside-in' traffic which drives relapses in MS. Therefore, therapies for progressive MS must be able to sufficiently cross the blood–brain barrier. Sufficiently long trial duration and multicomponent outcome measures are important for clinical studies in progressive MS. The success of trials on remyelination-promoting therapies mainly depends on the sufficient high dose of mAb, the optimal readout for ‘proof of concept’, time of treatment initiation, and appropriate selection of patients. Failed strategies are highly important to better understand assumed immunopathophysiological mechanisms and optimizing future trial designs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13311-022-01246-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9294122
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92941222022-07-20 What Have Failed, Interrupted, and Withdrawn Antibody Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis Taught Us? Krämer, Julia Wiendl, Heinz Neurotherapeutics Review In the past two decades, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have revolutionized the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, a remarkable number of mAbs failed due to negative study results were withdrawn because of unexpected serious adverse events (SAEs) or due to studies being halted for other reasons. While trials with positive outcomes are usually published in prestigious journals, negative trials are merely published as abstracts or not at all. This review summarizes MS mAbs that have either failed in phase II–III trials, have been interrupted for various reasons, or withdrawn from the market since 2015. The main conclusions that can be drawn from these 'negative' experiences are as follows. mAbs that have been proven to be safe in other autoimmune conditions, will not have the same safety profile in MS due to immunopathogenetic differences in these diseases (e.g., daclizumab). Identification of SAEs in clinical trials is difficult highlighting the importance of phase IV studies. Memory B cells are central players in MS immunopathogenesis (e.g., tabalumab). The pathophysiological mechanisms of disease progression are independent of leukocyte 'outside-in' traffic which drives relapses in MS. Therefore, therapies for progressive MS must be able to sufficiently cross the blood–brain barrier. Sufficiently long trial duration and multicomponent outcome measures are important for clinical studies in progressive MS. The success of trials on remyelination-promoting therapies mainly depends on the sufficient high dose of mAb, the optimal readout for ‘proof of concept’, time of treatment initiation, and appropriate selection of patients. Failed strategies are highly important to better understand assumed immunopathophysiological mechanisms and optimizing future trial designs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13311-022-01246-3. Springer International Publishing 2022-07-06 2022-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9294122/ /pubmed/35794296 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13311-022-01246-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review
Krämer, Julia
Wiendl, Heinz
What Have Failed, Interrupted, and Withdrawn Antibody Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis Taught Us?
title What Have Failed, Interrupted, and Withdrawn Antibody Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis Taught Us?
title_full What Have Failed, Interrupted, and Withdrawn Antibody Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis Taught Us?
title_fullStr What Have Failed, Interrupted, and Withdrawn Antibody Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis Taught Us?
title_full_unstemmed What Have Failed, Interrupted, and Withdrawn Antibody Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis Taught Us?
title_short What Have Failed, Interrupted, and Withdrawn Antibody Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis Taught Us?
title_sort what have failed, interrupted, and withdrawn antibody therapies in multiple sclerosis taught us?
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9294122/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35794296
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13311-022-01246-3
work_keys_str_mv AT kramerjulia whathavefailedinterruptedandwithdrawnantibodytherapiesinmultiplesclerosistaughtus
AT wiendlheinz whathavefailedinterruptedandwithdrawnantibodytherapiesinmultiplesclerosistaughtus