Suppr超能文献

环磷酰胺与甲泼尼龙治疗继发进展型多发性硬化的双盲对照随机试验

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

作者信息

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

机构信息

Service de Neurologie et INSERM-CHU CIC-P 0005, CHU de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.

INSERM U 1215, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2017 Jan 3;12(1):e0168834. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168834. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

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 /m2 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.

摘要

背景

继发进展型多发性硬化(SPMS)的治疗选择有限。开放标签研究表明,每月静脉注射环磷酰胺(CPM)无需诱导即可延缓疾病进展,但目前尚未进行随机试验。

目的

比较CPM与甲基泼尼松龙(MP)治疗SPMS的效果。

方法

对两个平行组进行随机双盲临床试验。招募过去一年中扩展残疾状态量表(EDSS)评分有记录的恶化且EDSS评分在4.0至6.5之间的SPMS患者,每四周接受一次静脉输注治疗(CPM:750mg/m²体表面积 - MP:1g),持续一年,第二年每八周一次。主要终点是EDSS恶化时间,在16周后确认,使用Cox模型进行分析。

结果

由于招募困难,在纳入138例患者(CPM组,n = 72;MP组,n = 66)后研究提前终止。在CPM组中,33例患者提前停止治疗,主要原因是耐受性问题,而MP组为22例。主要终点:与MP组相比,CPM组EDSS恶化的风险比为0.61[95%CI:0.31 - 1.22](p = 0.16)。根据二级多状态模型分析,CPM组患者停止治疗的可能性比MP组高2.2倍([1.14 - 4.29];p = 0.02),且在未提前停止治疗时残疾进展的可能性比MP组低2.7倍(HR = 0.37,95%CI:0.17 - 0.84;p = 0.02)。安全性符合预期。

结论

虽然主要终点为阴性,但二级分析表明CPM可降低SPMS进展风险,但其应用可能因耐受性低而受限。

试验注册

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00241254。

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