Occurrence of antibodies against natalizumab in relapsing multiple sclerosis patients treated with natalizumab.

Danish Multiple Sclerosis Center, Department of Neurology, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Denmark.
Multiple Sclerosis (Impact Factor: 4.47). 04/2011; 17(9):1074-8. DOI: 10.1177/1352458511404271
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In the clinical trials about 9% of natalizumab treated multiple sclerosis (MS) patients generated anti-natalizumab antibodies, of which 6% were persistent and 3% transient. The occurrence of antibodies reduced serum levels of natalizumab, decreased bio-efficacy, and abrogated the therapeutic efficacy.
The objective was to assess the frequency of anti-natalizumab antibodies in an unselected cohort of patients from four different countries.
We measured anti-natalizumab antibodies in a large cohort of 4881 unselected patients from four MS centres that systematically measured antibodies in patients treated with natalizumab. We applied the same ELISA assay developed by Biogen Idec and used in the pivotal trials of natalizumab.
Antibodies occurred in 4.5% (95% confidence interval, CI: 4.0-5.1%) of the patients, and were persistent in 3.5% (95% CI: 3.0-4.0%) and transient in 1.0% (95% CI: 0.7-1.3%) of the patients. The frequencies of permanently antibody positive patients did not show statistically significant differences between the four centres, whereas the frequencies of transiently antibody positive patients showed some variations.
The frequencies of antibodies appeared to be of the same magnitude in the four centres, but might be less than in the pivotal studies of natalizumab.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Natalizumab is an effective monoclonal antibody therapy for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) and interferes with immune cell migration into the central nervous system by blocking the α(4) subunit of very-late activation antigen-4 (VLA-4). Although well tolerated and very effective, some patients still suffer from relapses in spite of natalizumab therapy or from unwanted side effects like progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). In search of a routine-qualified biomarker on the effectiveness of natalizumab therapy we applied flow cytometry and analyzed natalizumab binding to α(4) and α(4) integrin surface levels on T-cells, B-cells, natural killer (NK) cells, and NKT cells from 26 RRMS patients under up to 72 weeks of therapy. Four-weekly infusions of natalizumab resulted in a significant and sustained increase of lymphocyte-bound natalizumab (p<0.001) which was paralleled by a significant decrease in detectability of the α(4) integrin subunit on all lymphocyte subsets (p<0.001). We observed pronounced natalizumab accumulations on T and B cells at single measurements in all patients who reported clinical disease activity (n = 4). The natalizumab binding capacity of in vitro saturated lymphocytes collected during therapy was strongly diminished compared to treatment-naive cells indicating a therapy-induced reduction of α(4). Summing up, this pilot study shows that flow cytometry is a useful method to monitor natalizumab binding to lymphocytes from RRMS patients under therapy. Investigating natalizumab binding provides an opportunity to evaluate the molecular level of effectiveness of natalizumab therapy in individual patients. In combination with natalizumab saturation experiments, it possibly even provides a means of studying the feasability of patient-tailored infusion intervals. A routine-qualified biomarker on the basis of individual natalizumab saturation on lymphocyte subsets might be an effective tool to improve treatment safety.
    PLoS ONE 01/2012; 7(2):e31784. · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In recent years, multiple sclerosis (MS) research has progressed on several fronts, prompting numerous clinical trials, primarily for immunotherapeutics. Although several new therapies have been disappointing and some were revealed to have devastating side effects, others have shown benefits and all have generated valuable knowledge about the progression of MS, the key contributors to pathogenesis, and on natural surveillance mechanisms for brain infections. This makes now a useful time to take stock of recent advances in developing MS treatments and consider new approaches for adding information where the gaps are greatest - mainly in understanding the degenerative processes responsible for most of the long-term disability. Here, we summarize currently accepted therapeutic principles and the drugs in late stages of development, as well as spotlighting potential novel openings for future research.
    Trends in Molecular Medicine 04/2013; · 9.57 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: A number of disease-modifying therapies have become available to treat multiple sclerosis (MS) in recent years. As the effects of these medications are unpredictable and they are generally used for a number of years, the selection of the most appropriate disease-modifying agent must be based on the long-term efficacy and toxicity profile, thus strategies to personalise treatment to optimise responses may be potentially very useful. Areas covered: This review provides an overview of the efficacy and toxicity of disease-modifying agents used in MS and specifically discusses any metabolic side effects and advances in personalising the use of each of these agents. Medline and EMBASE were searched for any articles regarding the efficacy, toxicity and personalised use of the medicines discussed in this review. Expert opinion: Disease-modifying agents used to treat MS differ substantially in their efficacy and toxicity profile, but metabolic side effects appear to be limited to alemtuzumab, teriflunomide and IFN-β. Although personalised treatment strategies to assist in selection of the most appropriate disease-modifying agent for MS are limited, there is substantial potential to use genetic sub-studies of the many recent trials investigating disease-modifying agents to develop personalised treatment strategies.
    Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism &amp Toxicology 06/2014; · 2.94 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 21, 2014