Cargando…
Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus low‐dose immunosuppression in secondary–progressive multiple sclerosis
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Effectiveness of autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) is well known, but in secondary–progressive (SP)‐MS it is still controversial. Therefore, AHSCT activity was evaluated in SP‐MS using low‐dose immunosup...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9306891/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35146841 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ene.15280 |
_version_ | 1784752643055288320 |
---|---|
author | Mariottini, Alice Bulgarini, Giovanni Forci, Benedetta Innocenti, Chiara Mealli, Fabrizia Mattei, Alessandra Ceccarelli, Chiara Repice, Anna Maria Barilaro, Alessandro Mechi, Claudia Saccardi, Riccardo Massacesi, Luca |
author_facet | Mariottini, Alice Bulgarini, Giovanni Forci, Benedetta Innocenti, Chiara Mealli, Fabrizia Mattei, Alessandra Ceccarelli, Chiara Repice, Anna Maria Barilaro, Alessandro Mechi, Claudia Saccardi, Riccardo Massacesi, Luca |
author_sort | Mariottini, Alice |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Effectiveness of autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) is well known, but in secondary–progressive (SP)‐MS it is still controversial. Therefore, AHSCT activity was evaluated in SP‐MS using low‐dose immunosuppression with cyclophosphamide (Cy) as a comparative treatment. METHODS: In this retrospective monocentric 1:2 matched study, SP‐MS patients were treated with intermediate‐intensity AHSCT (cases) or intravenous pulses of Cy (controls) at a single academic centre in Florence. Controls were selected according to baseline characteristics adopting cardinality matching after trimming on the estimated propensity score. Kaplan–Meier and Cox analyses were used to estimate survival free from relapses (R‐FS), survival free from disability progression (P‐FS), and no evidence of disease activity 2 (NEDA‐2). RESULTS: A total of 93 SP‐MS patients were included: 31 AHSCT, 62 Cy. Mean follow‐up was 99 months in the AHSCT group and 91 months in the Cy group. R‐FS was higher in AHSCT compared to Cy patients: at Year 5, 100% versus 52%, respectively (p < 0.0001). P‐FS did not differ between the groups (at Year 5: 70% in AHSCT and 81% in Cy, p = 0.572), nor did NEDA‐2 (p = 0.379). A sensitivity analysis including only the 31 “best‐matched” controls confirmed these results. Three neoplasms (2 Cy, 1 AHSCT) and two fatalities (2 Cy) occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides Class III evidence, in SP‐MS, on the superior effectiveness of AHSCT compared to Cy on relapse activity, without differences on disability accrual. Although the suppression of relapses was observed in the AHSCT group only, AHSCT did not show advantages over Cy on disability, suggesting that in SP‐MS disability progression becomes based more on noninflammatory neurodegeneration than on inflammation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9306891 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93068912022-07-28 Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus low‐dose immunosuppression in secondary–progressive multiple sclerosis Mariottini, Alice Bulgarini, Giovanni Forci, Benedetta Innocenti, Chiara Mealli, Fabrizia Mattei, Alessandra Ceccarelli, Chiara Repice, Anna Maria Barilaro, Alessandro Mechi, Claudia Saccardi, Riccardo Massacesi, Luca Eur J Neurol Multiple Sclerosis BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Effectiveness of autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) is well known, but in secondary–progressive (SP)‐MS it is still controversial. Therefore, AHSCT activity was evaluated in SP‐MS using low‐dose immunosuppression with cyclophosphamide (Cy) as a comparative treatment. METHODS: In this retrospective monocentric 1:2 matched study, SP‐MS patients were treated with intermediate‐intensity AHSCT (cases) or intravenous pulses of Cy (controls) at a single academic centre in Florence. Controls were selected according to baseline characteristics adopting cardinality matching after trimming on the estimated propensity score. Kaplan–Meier and Cox analyses were used to estimate survival free from relapses (R‐FS), survival free from disability progression (P‐FS), and no evidence of disease activity 2 (NEDA‐2). RESULTS: A total of 93 SP‐MS patients were included: 31 AHSCT, 62 Cy. Mean follow‐up was 99 months in the AHSCT group and 91 months in the Cy group. R‐FS was higher in AHSCT compared to Cy patients: at Year 5, 100% versus 52%, respectively (p < 0.0001). P‐FS did not differ between the groups (at Year 5: 70% in AHSCT and 81% in Cy, p = 0.572), nor did NEDA‐2 (p = 0.379). A sensitivity analysis including only the 31 “best‐matched” controls confirmed these results. Three neoplasms (2 Cy, 1 AHSCT) and two fatalities (2 Cy) occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides Class III evidence, in SP‐MS, on the superior effectiveness of AHSCT compared to Cy on relapse activity, without differences on disability accrual. Although the suppression of relapses was observed in the AHSCT group only, AHSCT did not show advantages over Cy on disability, suggesting that in SP‐MS disability progression becomes based more on noninflammatory neurodegeneration than on inflammation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-02-28 2022-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9306891/ /pubmed/35146841 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ene.15280 Text en © 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Neurology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Neurology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Multiple Sclerosis Mariottini, Alice Bulgarini, Giovanni Forci, Benedetta Innocenti, Chiara Mealli, Fabrizia Mattei, Alessandra Ceccarelli, Chiara Repice, Anna Maria Barilaro, Alessandro Mechi, Claudia Saccardi, Riccardo Massacesi, Luca Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus low‐dose immunosuppression in secondary–progressive multiple sclerosis |
title | Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus low‐dose immunosuppression in secondary–progressive multiple sclerosis |
title_full | Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus low‐dose immunosuppression in secondary–progressive multiple sclerosis |
title_fullStr | Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus low‐dose immunosuppression in secondary–progressive multiple sclerosis |
title_full_unstemmed | Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus low‐dose immunosuppression in secondary–progressive multiple sclerosis |
title_short | Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus low‐dose immunosuppression in secondary–progressive multiple sclerosis |
title_sort | autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus low‐dose immunosuppression in secondary–progressive multiple sclerosis |
topic | Multiple Sclerosis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9306891/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35146841 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ene.15280 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mariottinialice autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT bulgarinigiovanni autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT forcibenedetta autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT innocentichiara autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT meallifabrizia autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT matteialessandra autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT ceccarellichiara autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT repiceannamaria autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT barilaroalessandro autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT mechiclaudia autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT saccardiriccardo autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis AT massacesiluca autologoushaematopoieticstemcelltransplantationversuslowdoseimmunosuppressioninsecondaryprogressivemultiplesclerosis |