Friday, 27 January 2012

Research Beta Interferon does not stop secondary Progressive MS

La Mantia L, Vacchi L, Di Pietrantonj C, Ebers G, Rovaris M, Fredrikson S, Filippini G. Interferon beta for secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jan;1:CD005181.

BACKGROUND: Therapy with either recombinant beta-1a or beta-1b interferons (IFNs) is worldwide approved for Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS). A major unanswered question is whether this treatment is able to safely reverse or retard the progressive phase of the disease.

The main objective was to verify whether IFNs treatment in Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis (SPMS) is more effective than placebo in reducing the number of patients who experience disability progression.

SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis Group's Trials Register (1995 to 15 February 2011), the reference lists of relevant articles and conference proceedings were searched. Regulatory agencies were used as additional sources of information. All randomised, double or single blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of IFNs versus placebo in SPMS patients were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed all reports retrieved from the search. They independently extracted clinical, safety and MRI data, using a predefined data extraction form, resolving disagreements after discussion with a third reviewer. Risk of bias was evaluated to assess the quality of the studies. Treatment effect was measured using Risk Ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the binary outcomes and Standard Mean Difference with 95% CI for the continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS: Five RCTs met the inclusion criteria, from which 3122 (1829 IFN and 1293 placebo) treated patients contributed to the analysis. Included population was heterogeneous in terms of baseline clinical characteristics of the disease, in particular the percentage of patients affected by secondary progression with superimposed relapse ranging from 72% to 44%. IFN beta 1a and 1b did not decrease the risk of progression sustained at 6 months (Relative risk, 95% CI: 0.98, [0.82-1.16]) after three years of treatment. A significant decrease of the risk of progression sustained at 3 months (RR, 95% CI: 0.88 [0.80, 0.97]) and of the risk of developing new relapses at three years (RR 0.91, [0.84-0.97]) were found. The risk of developing new active brain lesions decreased over time but this data was obtained from single studies on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), performed in subgroups of patients; in spite of no effect on progression, the radiological data supported an effect on MRI parameters. The safety profile reflects what is commonly reported in MS IFN-treated patients.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Well designed RCTs, evaluating a high number of patients were included in the review. Recombinant IFN beta does not prevent the development of permanent physical disability in SPMS. We were unable to verify the effect on cognitive function for the lack of comparable data. This treatment significantly reduces the risk of relapse and of short -term relapse-related disability. Overall, these results show that IFNs' anti-inflammatory effect is unable to retard progression, when established. In the future, no new RCTs for IFNs versus placebo in SPMS will probably be undertaken, because research is now focusing on innovative drugs. We believe that this review gives conclusive evidence on the clinical efficacy of IFNs versus placebo in SPMS.
The Cochrane Collaboration is an international not-for-profit and independent organization, dedicated to making up-to-date, accurate information about the effects of healthcare readily available worldwide. It produces and disseminates systematic reviews of healthcare interventions and promotes the search for evidence in the form of clinical trials and other studies of interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration was founded in 1993 and named after the British epidemiologist, Archie Cochrane.

Recombinant IFN beta does not prevent the development of permanent physical disability in Secondary Progressive MS. This is old news


  1. Are your title and conclusion in conflict with each other? Or did I miss something?


Please note that all comments are moderated and any personal or marketing-related submissions will not be shown.