Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SMALL study age and discontinuation of DMT

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    SMALL study age and discontinuation of DMT

    Age May Protect Against Multiple Sclerosis Relapse After DMT Discontinuation

    Patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS) who are older than age 45 have less radiologic disease compared with younger patients after first-line disease-modifying therapy (DMT) discontinuation. These are the findings of a study published in the journal Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders.

    Patients increasingly receive DMT for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) relatively early after diagnosis. Therefore, it is important to understand the consequences of first-line DMT discontinuation. Previous studies have indicated a lower risk for clinical relapse in older patients, those with longer history of stable disease, and those with less radiologically evident disease. However, such research has focused largely on clinical relapse outcomes; by contrast, the relative importance of radiographic disease evidence after DMT discontinuation, and its strength of association with clinical relapse, are uncertain.

    For the study, researchers from the Netherlands recruited 130 patients (age >18 years) at MS Center Amsterdam and at Rijnstate Hospital Arnhem who had received first-line DMT (including any interferon medication, glatiramer acetate, teriflunomide, and dimethyl fumarate) for at least 6 months, had discontinued that medication without a plan to resume it or switch medications, and had follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data for at least 3 months after DMT discontinuation. Approximately 88% of these participants had RRMS; the remainder had secondary progressive MS.

    In addition to patient baseline and follow-up clinical data, and reason for DMT discontinuation, the researchers examined MRI studies for T2- and contrast-enhancing lesions.

    The researchers found that 43 patients most frequently discontinued DMT because of side effects.

    A total of 78 patients had disease activity after DMT discontinuation. Of these patients, 63 had radiological evidence of T2- or contrast-enhancing lesions, in a median time of 24 months post discontinuation. However, 38 of these patients with MRI-evident disease had not had a clinical relapse.

    Conversely, after a median 30.5 months, 40 patients had clinical relapses; 25 of these patients had radiologic activity in a follow-up MRI.

    The researchers noted that patient age at DMT discontinuation had the strongest association with renewed disease activity. In patients younger than age 45, MRI demonstrated disease activity in 68.6%, and 45.1% had a clinical relapse. However, in those age 45 and older, lesions on MRI were present in 35.3%, and 5.9% relapsed clinically.

    Logistic regression analysis confirmed the protective effect of age in patients between ages 45 and 55 compared with those younger than age 45 (OR, .301; P =.007) and in patients older than age 55 compared with those younger than age 45 (OR, .296; P =.044). Following DMT discontinuation, a lower risk for relapse(s) was seen in patients between ages 45 and 55 compared with those younger than age 45 (OR, 0.495, P =.106) and in patients older than age 55 compared with those younger than age 45 (OR, 0.081; P =.020).

    A total of 29 patients (approximately 22% of the cohort) resumed DMT after a median 17 months. Only 11 patients restarted with the DMT they had discontinued previously.

    Older patients were not significantly more likely to resume DMT, have clinically stable disease prior to discontinuation, or have prior abolition of radiographic disease.

    The researchers suggested that, given the clear protective effect of age, remaining on DMT might offer lower benefit relative to cost for older patients.

    Study limitations included potential selection bias, as the study participants had all self-discontinued DMT; differing follow-up frequencies among patients; and inclusion only of patients discontinuing first-line drugs.

    “[T]he occurrence of inflammatory disease activity is relatively infrequent in patients aged >55 years that discontinued DMT, and, when present, mostly radiological with a low number of T2-lesion,” the researchers concluded.

    https://www.neurologyadvisor.com/top...scontinuation/

    #2
    Study: Older MS patients who discontinue medications experience worsening of their disease.

    A third of older patients, including previously stable patients, experienced increased disability

    BUFFALO, N.Y. — In recent years, new drugs to treat multiple sclerosis have significantly improved both the quality of life and longevity for patients with MS. Many of them now live well into their 60s and70s, a significant improvement from just a generation ago when few patients lived to be 70.

    visual acuity, sensory symptoms and cognitive functioning.

    The researchers also found that patients with an EDSS of 6 were more likely to experience disease worsening/progression than those with lower disability status.

    A limitation of the study that the researchers acknowledge is that they didn’t utilize an age-matched control group that continued taking their medications. “The main caveat could be that these patients were going to have this progression regardless of whether or not they discontinued their medications,” said Jakimovski. “However, these limitations are still not sufficiently explaining the significant progression in a large percentage of the patients.”

    He added that a larger comparison trial is currently ongoing (Discontinuation of Disease Modifying Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis - DISCO-MS trial) and the results may provide greater insight and further guidelines for MS clinicians.

    https://www.buffalo.edu/news/releases/2021/12/002.html​

    Comment


      #3
      Hey Marco!

      Originally posted by Marco
      Study: Older MS patients who discontinue medications experience worsening of their disease.
      Originally posted by Marco
      "The main caveat could be that these patients were going to have this progression regardless of whether or not they discontinued their medications,”


      My guess is that the third of patients that had disease progression are Secondary Progressive.

      "Non-active SPMS is a secondary form of disease in which patients experience continuous disability progression in the absence of relapses. SPMS has a significant unmet need for effective treatments; mitoxantrone is the only approved disease-modifying treatment approved in the U.S. for this type of MS."

      Improvements Continue in Second SPMS Patient Given Foralumab | Multiple Sclerosis News Today

      I'm surprised that Secondary Progressive wasn't mentioned in the article.
      PPMS for 26 years (dx 1998)
      ~ Worrying will not take away tomorrow's troubles ~ But it will take away today's peace. ~

      Comment


        #4
        As someone very interested in these studies, it is confusing. I turn 60 this year and have been pretty stable for 10+ years. My Neuro right now leans more toward staying the course - why risk my stability? Our insurance will change next year, so part of me is worried about cost. Also would love to lose my port.

        I most likely went 13 plus years between first relapse and diagnosis, so 13 years without treatment. It makes me wonder if I was SPMS active when diagnosed, and now non-active and have been fortunate in disease course so far. This year is 30 years since initial relapse.

        The 1st study mentioned RRMS patients. I know previously neuros sometimes didn't like to change the label from RRMS to SPMS in the event the slightest chance they could benefit from DMTs. I wonder if that has changed with the further delineation of SPMS to active and non-active. Like you KoKo, it just makes me wonder if all the participants were truly RRMS or like my 3 neuros, they really do not know and don't want to chance it.
        Kathy
        DX 01/06, currently on Tysabri

        Comment


          #5
          I'm also very interested in these studies, thank you Marco! That said after reading both your posts I thought "hmmm clear as mud" lol.
          I suspect I will continue medication unless I get side effects that interfere with my quality of life. I haven't ever aspired to live too long and the further along I get the less interested in it I become. Getting old sure isn't for sissies, MS or not.
          He is your friend, your partner, your defender, your dog. You are his life, his love, his leader. He will be yours, faithful and true to the last beat of his heart. You owe it to him to be worthy of such devotion.
          Anonymous

          Comment


            #6
            I discussed with Neuro today. He said you really need to look at on an individual basis. But he did say I would probably be a good candidate to stop since I had a long duration between 1st and 2nd relapse, MRIs no change in 13 years, and living 30+ years with MS and not on a progressive course.

            We did also discuss that I am possibly SPMS non-active, but said he really couldn't answer and would not put me on an SPMS med since very mild progression.

            So plan is to take an MRI (been 4 years) then move Tysabri dosing to 8 weeks and see how I feel and discuss again in October. Since I am JC-, he hasn't felt the need for an MRI during the pandemic. Here is hoping still no change.

            He also said some insurance companies have started pushing back and denying coverage for some of these meds in patients 60+ based on questionable benefit to the patients outcome. Gotta love how insurance companies in the US dictate our treatment...
            Kathy
            DX 01/06, currently on Tysabri

            Comment


              #7
              I'm always hesitant to post these small studies about discontinuation of therapy. I know several people that stopped therapy (due to age) and then had significant declines. Insurance companies would welcome the cessation of therapy to save money. Pharmaceutical companies want us to continue therapy forever.

              My neurologist still has me listed as RRMS, but I am probably in the inactive SPMS category. In July, I turn 55 so my age is getting closer to considering stopping therapy. ​In 2012, I had a life-altering flare up that I never fully recovered from. Other flare ups w​ere disconcerting, but not fear provoking. I have now been stable on rituximab for the past 7 years, and I have no intentions of stopping.

              I believe the primary reason to permanently remain on therapy is in attempt to avoid accelerated brain volume loss.

              I wish you well...

              Comment


                #8
                I hear you Marco. He was basing his take on the DISCO study. He did also say you never know 100% who can and can not - that it is a risk that only the patient can assume. I am still weighing it. We also discussed waiting a few more years too and reevaluate. Just not sure I want to start a 4th DMT if I have to stop Tysabri.

                I am curious if you don't mind, on the friends that stopped, did their earlier relapses affect mobility and/or paralysis? I was wondering because one theory is that our earlier relapses leave damage that eventually lead to progression, and the more severe the earlier relapses, the more progression experienced later.

                Glad to hear you have been stable the last 7 years after a frightening experience. Stability is peace of mind for me, hence my hesitation too on stopping - why rock the boat?
                Kathy
                DX 01/06, currently on Tysabri

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by pennstater View Post
                  I hear you Marco.
                  I'm sorry! My comment was not directed to you specifically.

                  These are the people that I know more intimate details about, but there are others.

                  Two individuals were already in a wheelchair when they stopped Tysabri. Both experienced rebound and went downhill quickly. One went from a wheelchair to a powerchair in a few months, and lived two more years to age 75. The other passed at 78, nearly 5 years after discontinuing treatment. She had lost most of her upper body function (matching her lower body).

                  Another only had vision and bladder problems, but was using a walker within a year of stopping therapy. I believe she quit Copaxone at 61 or 62.

                  Another quit Gilenya promptly at 65, when she qualified for Medicare and retirement. She also went from fully ambulatory to walker in about 18 months. Gilenya also has a possible rebound. There's really just no way of knowing of how your body will respond. For me, I would rather spend 1/2 day, per year, in an infusion chair than worry about it.

                  I believe rituximab is my 7th DMT, so I completely understand about starting new ones. I have considered Kesimpta, and watching the BTK drugs for a future med.

                  I wish everyone well with their decisions. It's certainly a personal choice without a definitive answer.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    No worries Marco! Thank you for the response. I go back and forth on wanting to stop treatment and would be lying if I said there isn't some fear. Hearing other stories just helps me make a more informed decision. My decision will wait for another year or two and who knows by then what options may exist.

                    Thanks again!
                    Kathy
                    DX 01/06, currently on Tysabri

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X