Neurology Department, Fondazione IRCCS San Gerardi dei Tintori, Monza, Italy.
School of Medicine and Surgery and Milan Centre for Neuroscience (NeuroMI), University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Neurol Sci. 2024 May;45(5):1931-1944. doi: 10.1007/s10072-023-07228-3. Epub 2023 Dec 20.
The present study aims to describe the state of the art of fluid biomarkers use in ongoing multiple sclerosis (MS) clinical trials.A review of 608 ongoing protocols in the clinicaltrials.gov and EudraCT databases was performed. The trials enrolled patients with a diagnosis of relapsing remitting MS, secondary progressive MS, and/or primary progressive MS according to Revised McDonald criteria or relapsing MS according to Lublin et al. (2014). The presence of fluid biomarkers among the primary and/or secondary study outcomes was assessed.Overall, 5% of ongoing interventional studies on MS adopted fluid biomarkers. They were mostly used as secondary outcomes in phase 3-4 clinical trials to support the potential disease-modifying properties of the intervention. Most studies evaluated neurofilament light chains (NfLs). A small number considered other novel fluid biomarkers of neuroinflammation and neurodegeneration such as glial fibrillary acid protein (GFAP).Considering the numerous ongoing clinical trials in MS, still a small number adopted fluid biomarkers as outcome measures, thus testifying the distance from clinical practice. In most protocols, fluid biomarkers were used to evaluate the effectiveness of approved second-line therapies, but also, new drugs (particularly Bruton kinase inhibitors). NfLs were also adopted to monitor disease progression after natalizumab suspension in stable patients, cladribine efficacy after anti-CD20 discontinuation, and the efficacy of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT) compared to medical treatment. Nevertheless, further validation studies are needed for all considered fluid biomarkers to access clinical practice, and cost-effectiveness in the "real word" remains to be clarified.
本研究旨在描述在正在进行的多发性硬化症 (MS) 临床试验中使用液质生物标志物的最新进展。对 clinicaltrials.gov 和 EudraCT 数据库中 608 项正在进行的方案进行了审查。这些试验根据修订后的 McDonald 标准招募了诊断为复发缓解型 MS、继发进展型 MS 和/或原发进展型 MS 的患者,或根据 Lublin 等人的标准招募了复发型 MS (2014 年)。评估了主要和/或次要研究结果中是否存在液质生物标志物。
总体而言,正在进行的 MS 干预性研究中有 5%采用了液质生物标志物。它们主要作为 3 期-4 期临床试验的次要结局,以支持干预措施潜在的疾病修饰特性。大多数研究评估了神经丝轻链 (NfLs)。少数研究考虑了其他新型神经炎症和神经退行性的液质生物标志物,如神经胶质纤维酸性蛋白 (GFAP)。考虑到 MS 中有许多正在进行的临床试验,采用液质生物标志物作为结果测量的仍然很少,这证明了与临床实践的差距。在大多数方案中,液质生物标志物用于评估已批准的二线治疗的有效性,但也用于评估新药(特别是 Bruton 激酶抑制剂)的疗效。NfLs 还用于监测稳定患者停用那他珠单抗后的疾病进展、停用抗 CD20 后克拉屈滨的疗效,以及与药物治疗相比,自体造血干细胞移植 (AHSCT) 的疗效。然而,所有考虑的液质生物标志物都需要进一步验证研究才能进入临床实践,并且“真实世界”中的成本效益仍有待阐明。