Daclizumab HYP versus Interferon Beta-1a in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND Daclizumab high-yield process (HYP) is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to CD25 (alpha subunit of the interleukin-2 receptor) and modulates interleukin-2 signaling. Abnormalities in interleukin-2 signaling have been implicated in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis and other autoimmune disorders. METHODS We conducted a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 study involving 1841 patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis to compare daclizumab HYP, administered subcutaneously at a dose of 150 mg every 4 weeks, with interferon beta-1a, administered intramuscularly at a dose of 30 μg once weekly, for up to 144 weeks. The primary end point was the annualized relapse rate. RESULTS The annualized relapse rate was lower with daclizumab HYP than with interferon beta-1a (0.22 vs. 0.39; 45% lower rate with daclizumab HYP; P<0.001). The number of new or newly enlarged hyperintense lesions on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) over a period of 96 weeks was lower with daclizumab HYP than with interferon beta-1a (4.3 vs. 9.4; 54% lower number of lesions with daclizumab HYP; P<0.001). At week 144, the estimated incidence of disability progression confirmed at 12 weeks was 16% with daclizumab HYP and 20% with interferon beta-1a (P=0.16). Serious adverse events, excluding relapse of multiple sclerosis, were reported in 15% of the patients in the daclizumab HYP group and in 10% of those in the interferon beta-1a group. Infections were more common in the daclizumab HYP group than in the interferon beta-1a group (in 65% vs. 57% of the patients, including serious infection in 4% vs. 2%), as were cutaneous events such as rash or eczema (in 37% vs. 19%, including serious events in 2% vs. <1%) and elevations in liver aminotransferase levels that were more than 5 times the upper limit of the normal range (in 6% vs. 3%). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, daclizumab HYP showed efficacy superior to that of interferon beta-1a with regard to the annualized relapse rate and lesions, as assessed by means of MRI, but was not associated with a significantly lower risk of disability progression confirmed at 12 weeks. The rates of infection, rash, and abnormalities on liver-function testing were higher with daclizumab HYP than with interferon beta-1a. (Funded by Biogen and AbbVie Biotherapeutics; DECIDE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01064401.).

[1]  K. Wyrwich,et al.  Responder definition of the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale physical impact subscale for patients with physical worsening , 2014, Multiple sclerosis.

[2]  H. Wiendl,et al.  Modulation of IL-2Rα with daclizumab for treatment of multiple sclerosis , 2013, Nature Reviews Neurology.

[3]  Gavin Giovannoni,et al.  Daclizumab high-yield process in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (SELECT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial , 2013, The Lancet.

[4]  Bibiana Bielekova,et al.  Daclizumab Therapy for Multiple Sclerosis , 2012, Neurotherapeutics.

[5]  B. Bielekova,et al.  Inhibition of LTi Cell Development by CD25 Blockade Is Associated with Decreased Intrathecal Inflammation in Multiple Sclerosis , 2012, Science Translational Medicine.

[6]  R. Fontana,et al.  Causality assessment in drug‐induced liver injury using a structured expert opinion process: Comparison to the Roussel‐Uclaf causality assessment method , 2010, Hepatology.

[7]  Richard A. Rudick,et al.  The Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite , 2010, Neurology.

[8]  T. Waldmann,et al.  Regulatory CD56(bright) natural killer cells mediate immunomodulatory effects of IL-2Ralpha-targeted therapy (daclizumab) in multiple sclerosis. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  R. Temple,et al.  Hy's law: predicting serious hepatotoxicity , 2006, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[10]  S. Reingold,et al.  Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the “McDonald Criteria” , 2005, Annals of neurology.

[11]  Geert Molenberghs,et al.  Analyzing incomplete longitudinal clinical trial data. , 2004, Biostatistics.

[12]  A Thompson,et al.  The Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29): a new patient-based outcome measure. , 2001, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[13]  P. Matthews,et al.  Normalized Accurate Measurement of Longitudinal Brain Change , 2001, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[14]  M. Maguire,et al.  New low-contrast vision charts: reliability and test characteristics in patients with multiple sclerosis , 2000, Multiple sclerosis.

[15]  S. Reingold,et al.  The Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite measure (MSFC): an integrated approach to MS clinical outcome assessment , 1999, Multiple sclerosis.

[16]  L. Grattan,et al.  The brief repeatable battery of neuropsychological tests for multiple sclerosis: a preliminary serial study , 1995, Multiple sclerosis.

[17]  J. Kurtzke Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis , 1983, Neurology.

[18]  Lena Osterhagen,et al.  Multiple Imputation For Nonresponse In Surveys , 2016 .

[19]  Roland Martin,et al.  Anti-CD25 (daclizumab) monoclonal antibody therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. , 2012, Clinical immunology.