Queen Square Multiple Sclerosis Centre, Department of Neuroinflammation, University College London (UCL) Queen Square Institute of Neurology, Faculty of Brain Sciences, UCL, London, UK; National Institute for Health Research, University College London Hospitals, Biomedical Research Centre, London, UK.
Queen Square Multiple Sclerosis Centre, Department of Neuroinflammation, University College London (UCL) Queen Square Institute of Neurology, Faculty of Brain Sciences, UCL, London, UK.
Lancet Neurol. 2020 Mar;19(3):214-225. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30485-5. Epub 2020 Jan 22.
Neurodegeneration is the pathological substrate that causes major disability in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. A synthesis of preclinical and clinical research identified three neuroprotective drugs acting on different axonal pathobiologies. We aimed to test the efficacy of these drugs in an efficient manner with respect to time, cost, and patient resource.
We did a phase 2b, multiarm, parallel group, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial at 13 clinical neuroscience centres in the UK. We recruited patients (aged 25-65 years) with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis who were not on disease-modifying treatment and who had an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 4·0-6·5. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) at baseline, by a research nurse using a centralised web-based service, to receive twice-daily oral treatment of either amiloride 5 mg, fluoxetine 20 mg, riluzole 50 mg, or placebo for 96 weeks. The randomisation procedure included minimisation based on sex, age, EDSS score at randomisation, and trial site. Capsules were identical in appearance to achieve masking. Patients, investigators, and MRI readers were unaware of treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was volumetric MRI percentage brain volume change (PBVC) from baseline to 96 weeks, analysed using multiple regression, adjusting for baseline normalised brain volume and minimisation criteria. The primary analysis was a complete-case analysis based on the intention-to-treat population (all patients with data at week 96). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01910259.
Between Jan 29, 2015, and June 22, 2016, 445 patients were randomly allocated amiloride (n=111), fluoxetine (n=111), riluzole (n=111), or placebo (n=112). The primary analysis included 393 patients who were allocated amiloride (n=99), fluoxetine (n=96), riluzole (n=99), and placebo (n=99). No difference was noted between any active treatment and placebo in PBVC (amiloride vs placebo, 0·0% [95% CI -0·4 to 0·5; p=0·99]; fluoxetine vs placebo -0·1% [-0·5 to 0·3; p=0·86]; riluzole vs placebo -0·1% [-0·6 to 0·3; p=0·77]). No emergent safety issues were reported. The incidence of serious adverse events was low and similar across study groups (ten [9%] patients in the amiloride group, seven [6%] in the fluoxetine group, 12 [11%] in the riluzole group, and 13 [12%] in the placebo group). The most common serious adverse events were infections and infestations. Three patients died during the study, from causes judged unrelated to active treatment; one patient assigned amiloride died from metastatic lung cancer, one patient assigned riluzole died from ischaemic heart disease and coronary artery thrombosis, and one patient assigned fluoxetine had a sudden death (primary cause) with multiple sclerosis and obesity listed as secondary causes.
The absence of evidence for neuroprotection in this adequately powered trial indicates that exclusively targeting these aspects of axonal pathobiology in patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis is insufficient to mitigate neuroaxonal loss. These findings argue for investigation of different mechanistic targets and future consideration of combination treatment trials. This trial provides a template for future simultaneous testing of multiple disease-modifying medicines in neurological medicine.
Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) Programme, an MRC and NIHR partnership, UK Multiple Sclerosis Society, and US National Multiple Sclerosis Society.
神经退行性变是导致继发进展型多发性硬化症患者主要残疾的病理基础。临床前和临床研究的综合分析确定了三种具有不同轴突病理生物学作用的神经保护药物。我们旨在以有效、省时、省钱和节约患者资源的方式对这些药物进行疗效测试。
我们在英国 13 个临床神经科学中心进行了一项 2b 期、多臂、平行组、双盲、随机对照、安慰剂对照试验。我们招募了未接受疾病修正治疗且扩展残疾状况量表(EDSS)评分为 4.0-6.5 的继发进展型多发性硬化症患者。参与者在基线时通过一名研究护士使用中心化的网络服务以 1:1:1:1 的比例随机分配接受每日两次口服治疗,分别为阿米洛利 5mg、氟西汀 20mg、利鲁唑 50mg 或安慰剂,共 96 周。随机程序包括根据性别、年龄、随机化时的 EDSS 评分和试验地点进行最小化。胶囊的外观相同,以实现掩蔽。患者、研究者和 MRI 读取者均不知道治疗分配。主要结局测量指标为从基线到 96 周时的容积 MRI 脑容量百分比变化(PBVC),采用多元回归分析,根据基线正常化脑容量和最小化标准进行调整。主要分析是基于意向治疗人群(所有在第 96 周有数据的患者)的完整病例分析。该试验在 ClinicalTrials.gov 注册,NCT01910259。
2015 年 1 月 29 日至 2016 年 6 月 22 日期间,445 名患者被随机分配至阿米洛利组(n=111)、氟西汀组(n=111)、利鲁唑组(n=111)或安慰剂组(n=112)。主要分析包括 393 名患者,他们被分配至阿米洛利组(n=99)、氟西汀组(n=96)、利鲁唑组(n=99)和安慰剂组(n=99)。在 PBVC 方面,任何一种活性治疗与安慰剂之间均无差异(阿米洛利组 vs 安慰剂组,0.0%[95%CI -0.4 至 0.5;p=0.99];氟西汀组 vs 安慰剂组 -0.1%[-0.5 至 0.3;p=0.86];利鲁唑组 vs 安慰剂组 -0.1%[-0.6 至 0.3;p=0.77])。未报告新的安全性问题。严重不良事件的发生率较低,且在各组之间相似(阿米洛利组 10 例[9%],氟西汀组 7 例[6%],利鲁唑组 12 例[11%],安慰剂组 13 例[12%])。最常见的严重不良事件是感染和寄生虫感染。在研究期间,有 3 名患者死亡,死因被判断与活性治疗无关;1 名分配至阿米洛利的患者死于转移性肺癌,1 名分配至利鲁唑的患者死于缺血性心脏病和冠状动脉血栓形成,1 名分配至氟西汀的患者突然死亡(主要原因),多发性硬化症和肥胖症被列为次要原因。
在这项充分有力的试验中未发现神经保护作用的证据表明,仅针对继发进展型多发性硬化症患者的轴突病理生物学的这些方面不足以减轻神经轴突丢失。这些发现表明需要探索不同的机制靶点,并考虑未来的联合治疗试验。该试验为未来在神经科医学中同时测试多种疾病修正药物提供了模板。
疗效和机制评估(EME)计划,MRC 和 NIHR 合作,英国多发性硬化症协会和美国多发性硬化症协会。