• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

PMID:21348046
Abstract

PURPOSE

We compared the effectiveness and safety of disease-modifying drugs for the treatment of multiple sclerosis: Glatiramer acetate (Copaxone), interferon beta-1a (Avonex, Rebif), interferon beta-1b (Betaseron, Extavia), mitoxantrone (Novantrone), and natalizumab (Tysabri).

DATA SOURCES

We searched Ovid MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects through December 2009. For additional data we also hand searched reference lists, government web sites and dossiers submitted by pharmaceutical companies.

REVIEW METHODS

Study selection, data abstraction, validity assessment, grading the strength of the evidence, and data synthesis were all carried out according to standard Drug Effectiveness Review Project review methods.

RESULTS

In patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis, little difference in relapse outcomes were found between interferon beta-1a SC (Rebif) and interferon beta-1b (Betaseron), while interferon beta-1a IM (Avonex) was less effective than interferon beta-1a SC (Rebif) and interferon beta-1b (Betaseron) based on 4 fair-quality head-to-head trials. Direct evidence from 5 fair-quality head-to-head trials was conflicting on disease progression outcomes between the interferons. Pooled analysis of direct and indirect trial data found no difference between the interferons on changes in disability and no difference between interferon beta-1a SC (Rebif) and interferon beta-1a IM (Avonex) on disease progression but did find interferon beta-1b (Betaseron) to be superior to interferon beta-1a IM (Avonex) on disease progression (relative risk, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.86). There was no difference in relapse or disease progression between glatiramer and interferon beta-1a SC (Rebif) or interferon beta-1b (Betaseron) based on 2 head-to-head trials. Evidence is insufficient to make any judgments regarding effectiveness in primary progressive or secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Evidence suggested that all 3 interferon beta-1 products and glatiramer reduced the probability of converting from clinically isolated syndrome to clinically definite multiple sclerosis over 2 to 5 year periods. Interferon beta-1a IM (Avonex) appeared to have the lowest immunogenicity, with rates of development of neutralizing antibodies of 2% to 8.5%, starting around 9 months of treatment. With interferon beta-1a SC (Rebif) antibodies occurred later with rates of immunogenicity between 12% and 46%, and with interferon beta-1b SC (Betaseron) neutralizing antibodies appeared as early as 3 months in 30% to 40% of patients. Evidence for interferon beta-1b SC (Betaseron) and interferon beta-1a SC (Rebif) indicated that consistent positive neutralizing antibody status with high titer increased relapse rates, by one-half to two-thirds, during longer periods of follow-up. This difference was not seen with follow-up of 2 years or less, and there was inadequate evidence to conclude that there is an impact on disease progression. No difference was found in withdrawal rates among beta interferons in head-to-head trials. Transaminase elevations were common with all beta interferon products, with little difference in rates of occurrence. There was a lower rate of depression in patients taking interferon beta-1a (Rebif) compared with the other interferons based on limited trial data. Interferon beta-1a IM (Avonex) was associated with the highest rates of flu-like syndrome compared with the other beta interferons. Interferon beta-1b SC (Avonex) was associated with the lowest rates of injection site reactions whereas interferon beta-1b SC (Betaseron) and interferon beta-1b SC (Rebif) had similar rates. Significant long-term concerns included progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in patients receiving natalizumab >12 months, lipoatrophy with prolonged use of glatiramer, and permanent amenorrhea in older women receiving higher total dose of mitoxantrone. There was some evidence that response to beta interferons and glatiramer differs in men and women, but there was no evidence that this difference favors one product over another. Evidence is insufficient to make conclusions about the safety of these drugs in pregnancy. A post hoc subgroup analysis of a head-to-head trial of interferon beta-1a products (Avonex and Rebif) found that African-American patients experienced more exacerbations and were less likely to be exacerbation-free compared with white patients over the course of the study.

CONCLUSION

There was fair evidence that interferon beta-1a IM (Avonex) is less effective than interferon beta-1a SC (Rebif) and interferon beta-1b (Betaseron) for preventing relapse in patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. On other outcomes and in other populations, direct evidence is either lacking or shows few differences in effectiveness or safety among the disease-modifying drugs used to treat multiple sclerosis.

摘要

相似文献

1
2
Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis.用于多发性硬化症的免疫调节剂和免疫抑制剂:一项网状Meta分析
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 6;2013(6):CD008933. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008933.pub2.
3
Treatment with disease-modifying drugs for people with a first clinical attack suggestive of multiple sclerosis.对首次出现提示多发性硬化症临床发作的患者使用疾病修饰药物进行治疗。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 25;4(4):CD012200. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012200.pub2.
4
Interferons and natalizumab for multiple sclerosis.干扰素和那他珠单抗用于治疗多发性硬化症。
GMS Health Technol Assess. 2008 Oct 1;4:Doc09.
5
Adverse effects of immunotherapies for multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis.免疫疗法治疗多发性硬化症的不良反应:一项网络荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Nov 30;11(11):CD012186. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012186.pub2.
6
Comparative effectiveness of interferons in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a meta-analysis of real-world studies.干扰素在复发缓解型多发性硬化症中的比较疗效:一项真实世界研究的荟萃分析
Curr Med Res Opin. 2017 Mar;33(3):579-593. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2016.1276895. Epub 2017 Jan 11.
7
Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis.免疫调节剂和免疫抑制剂治疗复发缓解型多发性硬化症的网状 Meta 分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jan 4;1(1):CD011381. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011381.pub3.
8
A comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis of treatments for multiple sclerosis.多发性硬化症治疗的综合成本效益分析。
Int J MS Care. 2011 Fall;13(3):128-35. doi: 10.7224/1537-2073-13.3.128.
9
Comparing the cost-effectiveness of disease-modifying drugs for the first-line treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.比较疾病修饰药物用于复发缓解型多发性硬化症一线治疗的成本效益。
J Manag Care Pharm. 2009 Sep;15(7):543-55. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2009.15.7.543.
10
Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis.用于复发缓解型多发性硬化症的免疫调节剂和免疫抑制剂:一项网状荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Sep 18;2015(9):CD011381. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011381.pub2.