4.4 Article

Rituximab in multiple sclerosis: Frequency and clinical relevance of anti-drug antibodies

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
Volume 24, Issue 9, Pages 1224-1233

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458517720044

Keywords

Antidrug antibodies; rituximab; multiple sclerosis; anti-CD20; MAb; immunogenicity; B-cell depletion

Funding

  1. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Award [MS-1511-33196]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Rituximab is a chimeric monoclonal anti-CD20 B-cell-depleting antibody increasingly used off-label in multiple sclerosis (MS). The clinical relevance of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) against rituximab in MS is unknown. Objective: To determine frequency of ADA in relation to B-cell counts, allergic reactions and clinical efficacy in a large cohort of MS-treated patients. Methods: Cross-sectional study with collection of serum samples from 339 MS patients immediately before a scheduled rituximab infusion. ADAs were detected using an in-house-validated electrochemiluminescent immunoassay and a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to compare methods. Data on patient demographics and clinical outcomes were retrieved from the Swedish MS Registry and patient records. Results: ADAs were detected in 37% of relapsing-remitting MS and 26% in progressive forms of MS. Presence of ADAs decreased with increasing number of rituximab infusions. There was a significant association between both presence and titres of ADAs and incomplete B-cell depletion, but not with infusion/adverse reactions or clinical outcomes at the group level. Only five patients terminated rituximab during follow-up, four of which were ADA positive. Conclusion: Rituximab treatment is associated with a high degree of ADAs, which correlates with efficacy of B-cell depletion; however, the clinical relevance of ADAs remains uncertain.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available