4.7 Article

From natalizumab to fingolimod in eight weeks - Immunological, clinical, and radiological data in quest of the optimal switch

Journal

CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 176, Issue -, Pages 87-93

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.clim.2017.01.001

Keywords

Biomarkers; Natalizumab; Fingolimod; Multiple sclerosis; Treatment change; Flow cytometry

Categories

Funding

  1. Genmab
  2. UCB Pharma
  3. Biogen-Idec
  4. Novartis
  5. Red Bull
  6. Merck
  7. European Union
  8. FWF Osterreichischer Fond zur Wissenschaftsforderung
  9. Bundesministerium fur Wissenschaft und Forschung
  10. Almirall
  11. Bayer
  12. Genzyme
  13. Medtronic
  14. Merck-Serono
  15. Roche
  16. Sanofi-Aventis
  17. TEVA ratiopharm
  18. Biogen-ldec
  19. Merck Serono
  20. Teva

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Natalizumab (NZB) discontinuation during a treatment change is associated with recurrence of disease activity in a significant proportion of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. The immunological basis why disease reactivation occurs in selected patients is unresolved. In search of a prognostic biomarker for a safe and effective transition from NZB to fingolimod, we monitored five parameters related to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of the two drugs in 12 MS patients until six months on fingolimod. Clearance of free and cell-bound NZB, re-expression of alpha-4, and fingolimod-mediated changes on CD8+ and CD4+ T cell subsets showed pronounced interindividual variability. Higher frequencies of memory CD8+ T cells after six months on fingolimod were the sole association with disease reactivation. None of the investigated parameters thus had potential as prognostic biomarker for the outcome of the switch. Our findings rather support the thesis of broad interindividual differences in the immunopathogenesis of MS. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available