4.7 Article

Natalizumab in progressive MS Results of an open-label, phase 2A, proof-of-concept trial

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 82, 期 17, 页码 1499-1507

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000361

关键词

-

资金

  1. Biogen Idec
  2. Danish MS Society
  3. Danish Council for Strategic Research [2142-08-0039]
  4. Brdr. Ronje Holding
  5. Lundbeck Foundation [R59-2010-5399] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective:Natalizumab inhibits the migration of systemic immune cells to the CNS and may be beneficial in progressive multiple sclerosis (MS). The objective of the study was to examine the effects of natalizumab in progressive MS.Methods:In an open-label phase 2A study, 24 patients with progressive MS were included to receive natalizumab treatment for 60 weeks. Response to natalizumab was assessed in CSF and MRI studies. The primary endpoint was change in CSF osteopontin, a biomarker of intrathecal inflammation, from baseline to week 60.Results:Seventeen patients completed the study. No new safety issues were encountered. CSF osteopontin decreased by 65 ng/mL (95% confidence interval 34-96 ng/mL; p = 0.0004) from baseline to week 60 in conjunction with decreases in other CSF biomarkers of inflammation, axonal damage, and demyelination. Magnetization transfer ratio increased in both cortical gray and normal-appearing white matter and correlated with decreases in CSF neurofilament light chain.Conclusions:Natalizumab treatment of progressive MS reduces intrathecal inflammation and tissue damage, supporting a beneficial effect of natalizumab treatment in progressive MS and suggesting that systemic inflammation contributes to the pathogenesis. Moreover, the study establishes the feasibility of using CSF biomarkers in proof-of-concept trials, allowing a low number of participants and short study duration.Classification of evidence:This study provides Class IV evidence that in patients with progressive MS, natalizumab reduces biomarkers of intrathecal inflammation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据