throbber
Stepped-Care Approach to Treating MS:
`A Managed Care Treatment Algorithm
`
`SHELDON J. RICH. RPh, PhD: IMELDA C. COLEMAN. PharmD: RICHARD COOK. PharmD: DOUGLAS S. HUM, FIPh;
`BEN JOHNSON, RPh, MBA: TERRY MAVES, RPh: WILLIAM J. MAZANEC, PharmD, MBA; JAMES R. MILLER, MD;
`WOODROW J. PROVEAUX, PharmD; HOWARD S. ROSSMAN, DO, FACN; and WILLIAM H. STUART, MD
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`OBJECTIVE To introduce a model treatrnentalgorithm for use in the managed
`care setting as a strategy to provide ongoing disease management and long-term
`care for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), with the goal of delaying disease
`progression and the associated disability and cognitive dysfunction.
`
`SUMMARY: MS is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the central nervous system
`that is associated with progressive disability and cognitive dysfunction. Currently,
`management of MS involves planning an effective long-term treatment strategy
`that can delay the progression of the disease. This article reviews a typical
`stepped-care approach to treating MS that is based on the concept of a platform
`drug, which is an agent that provides baseline immunomodulatory action
`throughout the course of the disease.
`Considerations for selecting a platform therapy include the effect on the full
`spectrum of MS (disability, relapses, lesion load, and atrophy as well as patient
`compliance and the potential impact of neutralizing antibodies [NAbsD. Currently,
`4 first-line therapies are approved for relapsing M8: the 3 interferon beta (lFNfi)
`products and glatiramer acetate. Of these, the lFNt3s are generally recommended
`as platform therapy because all have shown significant effects on relapses, mag-
`netic resonance imaging parameters of the disease, and because intramuscular
`(IM) |FNt3-1a (Avonex) and subcutaneous (SC) IFNB-1a (Rebif) have been shown
`to slow the progression of sustained disability.
`Patients being treated with |FN|3s can develop NAbs to the drug, which can
`lead to a loss of efficacy and subsequent occunence of breakthrough disease.
`The 3 different fonnulations of |FNt3 are associated with a varying incidence of
`NAbs (IM lFNt3-1a, 5%; SC lFNp-1a, 24%; IFNB-1b [Betaseron], 45%). Antibodies
`also form against glatiramer acetate, although their clinical significance needs
`to be elucidated. As the disease progresses or has periods of aggressive activity,
`the stepped-care approach is to add other agents onto the platfonn therapy to
`improve control of the disease.
`
`CONCLUSION: Stepped care, as outlined in this model treatment algorithm for the
`managed care setting, is an effective method to achieve the fundamental goal of
`MS treatment, that is, to delay disease progression and the associated disability
`and cognitive impairment
`
`KEYWORDS: Multiple sclerosis, Stepped care,Treatment algorithm
`
`J Manag Care Phann. 2004;1D(3)(supp| S-b):S26-S32
`
`ultiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic demyelinating disease
`of the central nervous system. Natural history data sug-
`gest that in a majority of patients diagnosed with clini-
`cally definite MS, the disease progresses from an initial relapsing-
`remitting form to a secondary progressive type.‘ Delaying pro-
`gression of the disease and the associated disability and cognitive
`dysfunction is one of the fundamental goals of MS therapy To
`achieve this objective, an individualized, dynamic,
`long-term
`treatment strategy should be implemented along with ongoing
`monitoring of disease activity The treatment plan should be able
`to adapt to the changing needs of the individual patient, based on
`clinical findings of disease progression, severity of MS symptoms,
`increase of disease burden on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI),
`and development of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs).
`Approved first-line therapies for
`relapsing-remitting MS
`include the 3 interferon beta (IFNB) products: intramuscular (IM)
`IFNB-la, (IM IFNB-la [Avonex, Biogen Idec lnc., Cambridge,
`MA]); subcutaneous (SC) IFNE-la (SC IFNB-la [Rebif, Serono,
`Inc., Rockland, MA]); and IFNB-lb (Betaseron, Berlex
`laboratories, Montville, NJ) and glatiramer acetate (Copaxone,
`Teva Neuroscience, Inc., Kansas City, MO)? Consequently, these
`drugs are used as baseline immunomodulatory agents (platform
`drugs) in the treatment of MS. These treatments are proven to
`slow various aspects of MS; however, most patients will experi-
`
`xlullrnrs
`
`SHELDON]. RICH, RPli, PILD, is president, S}R Associates, LLC, West Bloomfield,
`Michigan; clinical assistcmt professor, Uni/ersity of Michigan, Ann Arbor; and
`adjunct assistant professor, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan; IMELDA C.
`COLEMAN, PI1armD, is clinical pharmacist BlueCross/BlueSlu'eld of Louisiana,
`Baton Rouge; RICHARD COOK, PharmD, is manager, clinical and quality pro-
`grams, Blue Care Networlz of Michigan, Grand Rapids; DOUGLAS 5. HUM, RPI1,
`is director ofpltannacy servicm, Medica Health Plans, Minnetonlaa, Minnmota;
`BEN JOHNSON, RPI1, MBA, is phannacy contract manager, Intermountain Health
`Care, Salt Lalze City, Utah; TERRY MAVES, RPII, is phanrracy director, Touclipoint
`Health Plan, Appleton, VVscorisir|; WILLIAM MAZANEC, Pl'tarmD, MBA, is
`vice president, clinical andformulary management, CuraScript, Orlando, Florida;
`JAMIE R MILLER, MD, was director, Multiple Sclerosis Center; Columbia-
`Prmlzyterian Malical Center, Columbia Unir/ersity, New Yorlt, New Yorlz (now
`retired); WOODROW PROVEAUX, PharmD, is clinical pharmacy director, Care
`First BlueCross/BlueSlu’eId, Baltimore, Maryland; HOWARD S. ROSSMAN, DO,
`FACN, is medical director, Multiple Sclerosis Center, Michigan Institute For
`Neurological Disorders, Farmington Hills; WILLIAM H. STUART, MD, is medical
`director Multiple Sclerosis Center ofAtlanta, Georgia.
`
`AUTHOR CORRESPONDENCE Sheldon]. Rich, RPI1, PIID, President SIR
`Associates LLC, 4223 Fieldbroolz Rd, West Bloomfield MI 48323-3207.
`Tel.‘ (248) 932-8500; Fax.‘ (248) 932-2972; E-mail: S]RAssociat6@aol.com
`
`CopyrigIit© 2004, Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. All rights merved.
`
`526 Supplement to Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy
`
`JMCP June 20(
`
`"““‘E’XHIBIT NO. 1031 Page 1
`
` AMNEAL
`
`

`
`Stepped-Care Approach to Treating MS: A Managed Care Treatment Algorithm
`
` ence disease progression. In patients undergoing treatment with a
`Diagnosis and Therapy Selection
`platform drug, ongoing monitoring of disease activity, including
`Clinically isolated
`regular MRI scans, may identify breakthrough disease (i.e., fre-
`syndrome + MRI to :5
`quent exacerbations and increased disability). Once identified, cli-
`support diagnosis
`nicians can add corticosteroids or a number of other secondary
`agents, as necessary, to the platform drug to manage breakthrough
`disease.’ This article reviews issues relating to long-term treatment
`strategies and ongoing disease management in MS and provides a
`model treatment algorithm for use in the managed care setting.
`
`
`
`0Patienteducation
`
`1 Diagnosis and Therapy Selection
`
`Diagnosis
`A single clinical event indicative of demyelination is often the ear-
`liest symptom detected in patients with MS. Typically, patients
`present to their primary care physician with an isolated clinical
`event, for example, optic neuritis in one eye or numbness on one
`side of the body. Once a patient is refened to a neurologist, a diag-
`nosis of clinically isolated syndrome (C15) is made based on a neu-
`rologic or ophthalmologic examination, or both, confirming the
`clinical event consistent with demyelination involving the optic
`nerve (optic neuritis), spinal cord (incomplete transverse myelitis),
`or brainstem or cerebellum (brainstem or cerebellar syndrome)?
`Following a diagnosis of CIS and exclusion of alternate diag-
`noses,
`the patients risk of developing clinically definite MS
`(CDMS) is evaluated. Historically, a diagnosis of CDMS was made
`following the occurrence of a second clinical demyelinating event.’
`However, because the time between the first and second attacks
`
`varies considerably, diagnosis and therapy initiation could take
`several years. Many studies have therefore evaluated the risk of
`developing CDMS in patients diagnosed with CIS using paraclin-
`ical measures, such as MRI, evoked potentials, and examination of
`cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) for the presence of oligoclonal bands. Of
`these measures, MRI has been shown to be the most sensitive
`
`method for predicting the development of CDMS in patients with
`suspected MS.° Further, the prognostic value of MRI in MS has been
`demonstrated in prospective follow-up studies of patients with
`CIS." Diagnostic criteria for MS now include MR1 as a paraclinical
`diagnostic tool° because the presence of characteristic MS lesions on
`MRI is associated with a high risk of developing CDMS."‘°'“
`
`Therapeutic Plan Development
`and Selection of a Platform Therapy
`
`The National Multiple Sclerosis Society recommends initiation of
`treatment as soon as possible after a definitive diagnosis of MS is
`made and also recommends that treatment be initiated in patients
`at high risk of developing MS.“
`Following the decision to initiate therapy, one of the first steps is
`selection of an appropriate platform drug (Figure 1), which is
`defined as an agent that can provide baseline imrnunomodulatory
`action throughout the course of the disease. Platform treatment may
`be adequate treatment for many patients for years; however, for
`patients with aggressive disease, additional agents can be added to
`
`
`
`plan°Settingexpectations0Caremanagement
`
`
`
`Neurologist recommends appropriate therapy based on:
`0 Evidence-based efficacy
`- Patient lifestyle: likelihood patient will comply with dosing
`and administration regimen
`° Low immunogenicity
`0 Ability for long—term treatment (suitability and tolerability)
`
`The decision to initiate treatmentfor multiple sclerosis (MS) is followed by careful comid-
`eratian of the availablefirsblirre or "platfvn'n' therapies. Educating patients rmd setting
`realistic treatment expectations are also importantfactors in designing an effective long-
`term treatment plan. lFNfi = interferon beta; MRI = magnetic resommce imaging.
`
`the platform drug, based on symptoms and disease progression.
`Platform therapy options are the 4 drugs that are approved by the
`U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in relapsing MS:
`IFNB-1b, ll\/I IFNB-la, SC IFNB-la, and glatiramer acetate. The rel-
`ative efficacy side effects, convenience, and compliance issues relat-
`ing to these drugs (discussed in the article by Vl/illiam H. Stuart in
`this supplement) should be considered when evaluating the differ-
`ent platform drugs. IFNBS are recommended as platform therapy
`because they have an impact on relapses and lesions on MRI. In
`addition, IM and SC IFNB-la have been shown to slow the pro-
`gression of sustained disability”“° and IM and SC IFNB- lb therapies
`have been shown to significantly decrease brain atrophy. ‘"3
`Given the long-terrn nature of MS treatment, the clinical aspects
`of the available platform drugs should be given careful considera-
`tion before initiating treatment. The complications that may arise
`due to the generation of NAbs to IFNB also should be taken into
`account (for a detailed discussion, see the article by Howard S.
`Rossman in this supplement). These complications include
`reduced efficacy of the drug and cross-reactivity of NAbs that make
`switching between lFNfi products impractical. The neurologist
`must consider these factors and assist individual patients ir1 select-
`ing the appropriate agent rather than simply providing general
`information to patients and having them select a drug.
`Ongoing patient education sets realistic expectations for agent
`effectiveness. For instance, after treatment initiation, a patient may
`experience exacerbations or relapses for some time. Generally, the
`IFNs require 3 to 6 months of treatment to become fully effective,
`and glatiramer aoetate may take up to 9 months to become fully
`effective. Patients must also be aware of the potential side effects of
`the chosen platform therapy Some of the common side effects asso-
`ciated with IFNB treatment are injection-site reactions (mostly SC
`formulations),
`flu-like symptoms, and headache.“”l These side
`
`www.a.n1cp.org Vol. 10, No. 3,
`
`PP'rL'7rH1B1-t°'NU9°°fo3 f"”?fiVg€’2
`
`
`
`Patient meets dia ostic criteria for MS
`
`
`
`Develop therapeutic plan
`and select platform therapy
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` AMNEAL
`
`

`
`Stepped-care Approach to Treating MS: A Managed Care Treatment Algorithm
`
`
`
`aggravates or leads to other symptoms, causing a cycle of inter-
`dependent symptoms. Disease progression also can lead to a wide
`range of complicating symptoms requiring additional treatments.
`Educating pritnary care physicians and nurses to identify symp-
`toms that the patient is experiencing, and encouraging patients to
`avoid using multiple over-the-counter medications, vitamins, and
`herbal preparations are important symptom management tools.
`Not all drugs listed in the following section are approved by the
`FDA for use in MS. These drugs are discussed to educate phar-
`macists about medications that neurologists empirically have
`found useful and commonly prescribe for patients with MS.
`Spasticity. Impairment of muscle function is one of the most
`common symptoms of MS, affecting an estimated 40% to 75% of
`patients,‘””‘ and spasticity accounts for most of the physical dis-
`ability seen in MS patients. Nonpharmacologic treatment options
`for spasticity include carefully planned, physician recommended
`exercise regimens (including aerobic exercise, stretching exercises
`to improve flexibility, and both active and passive movements that
`incorporate the full range of motion) and relaxation techniques
`(such as yoga, meditation, biofeedback, and tai chi). Pharma-
`cologic treatments include baclofen (GABAB-receptor stimulator
`[Lioresal]), tizanidine (oi-adrenergic receptor agonist [Zanaflex]),
`and benzodiazepines.
`Fatigue. Fatigue is reported by 80% to 97% of patients with MS
`and is characterized by a lack of energy, an overwhelming sense of
`tiredness, or a feeling of exhaustion.’”’ Nonpharrnacologic man-
`agement of fatigue involves treating symptoms in patients that lead
`to fatigue, such as depression and sleep disturbances, and improv-
`ing patient mobility through exercise. Pharrnacologic treatments
`include the off-label use of modafinil (Provigil).’“" The N-methyl-
`D-aspartate antagonist arnantadine (Symrnetrel), methylphenidate
`(Ritalin), and amphetamines also are used off-label to treat fatigue .1“
`Depression. The lifetime prevalence of depre$ion among
`patients with MS is 47% to 54%. Nonpharrnacologic treatment con-
`sists of psychotherapy,‘°’” and pharmacologic agents used to treat
`depression include selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIS
`[e.g.,
`fluoxetirie, serttaline, paroxetine, escitalopram, and citalo-
`pram]), tricyclic antidepressants (e.g., arnitriptyline and nortripty-
`line), and atypical antidepressants (e.g., bupropion and venlafaxine).
`Bladder dysfunction. Bladder symptoms are experienced by
`80% to 96% of patients with MS and include overactive bladder
`(detrusor hyperreflexia) and urinary retention (overactive sphinc-
`ter).‘3 Treatment for overactive bladder consists of anticholinergics
`(e .g., oxybutynin and tolterodine), and treatment for urinary
`retention involves the off-label use of (1-adrenergic antagonists
`(e .g., tamsulosin, doxazosin, and terazosin).‘°‘”
`Pain. Approximately 65% of patients with MS experience
`acute and subacute painful syndromes, the extent and impact of
`which are often underestimated.“~" Paroxysmal neuropathic pain
`is acute and intense; may worsen with age and disease progres-
`sion’’; and includes trigeminal neuralgia, which is triggered by
`sensory stimuli at Various points on the face or head, l_hermitte‘s
`
`
`
`
`
`-Symptommanagement-MRItomonitordisease
`
`Test for neutralizing antibodies‘
`
`and repeat NAb test In
`6 mon1.hs.lIpers1s:nt.
`
`
`
`onsi r
`
`‘ Wait at least 30 days after last corticosteroid
`treatment if patient is being treated with corticosteroids.
`
`°°mbimtl°“ ‘h"3PY
`
`A dynamic treatment strategy consists of altering treatment as needed based on
`periodic monitoring of multiple sclerosis symptoms, disease burden on magnetic
`resonance imaging (MRI), patient compliance, andformation of neutralizing
`antibodies. lFN|3 = interferon beta; W = intramuscular; SC = subcutaneous.
`
`effects can be managed, and appropriate patient education and
`ongoing monitoring can improve the experience and minimize the
`risk of patient noncompliance. Glatiramer acetate also is associated
`with injection-site reactions, including lipoatrophy.” Additional side
`effects with glatiramer acetate include chest pain, lyrnphadenopathy,
`and postinjection systemic reactions."
`
`1 Ongoing Disease Management
`
`Effective, dynamic treatment strategies require initiation of plat-
`form therapy followed by regular, ongoing monitoring of patients
`for MS symptoms and disease activity. Ongoing monitoring of
`patients with MS can aid early detection of breakthrough disease.
`Occurrence of breakthrough disease is identified on an individual
`basis based on unacceptable disease progression. Possible criteria
`to assist
`in this determination include disability progression
`(e.g.,
`increase of 21 point on the Expanded Disability Status
`Scale), multiple relapses in a short time span (e.g., 22 relapses m
`6 months after 1 year of IFNB therapy), development of new neu-
`rologic deficits, or deterioration evident on MRI.” Factors such as
`poor patient adherence and development of NAbs can contribute
`to the occurrence of breakthrough disease in patients on a plat-
`form drug and should therefore be monitored as well (Figure 2).
`
`Symptom Management
`
`The most common symptoms of MS are spasticity, fatigue, sexual
`dysfunction, bladder dysfunction, pain, and cognitive dysfunc-
`tion. Other frequently noted symptoms include depression, bowel
`dysfunction, paroxysmal symptoms, and weakness.‘‘*’’ Many MS
`symptoms can be interrelated such that one untreated symptom
`
`S28 Supplement to Journal of Managed Care Phamiacy JMCP June 20C
`
`““‘E’XHIBIT NO. 1031 Page 3
`
`HGURE 2 Ongoing Disease Management
`IFN -1 —Rel:rif
`
`lFNfi-gb-getaseron
`acetate
`(SC)
`
`
`IFNfl‘1“‘AV°nex
`OM)
`
`G151i1"r1mE1’
`
`
`
`B hh
`At 12 months and if
`tea
`bmakthmugh disease
`Check patient compliance
`
`d-
`rough isease
`
`
`
`
`
` AMNEAL
`
`

`
`Stepped-Care Approach to Treating MS: A Managed care Troatmem Algorithm
`
`phenomenon caused by cervical cord lesions, and dystonic
`spasms from paroxysmal dystonia. Treatment options for such
`pain include anticonvulsants, antispasmodics, and surgery.
`Constant neuropathic pain also can occur and may require the use
`of anticonvulsants, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioid
`narcotics, nerve blocks, or tricyclic antidepressants.“-"
`Sexual dysfunction. Approximately 48% to 75% of patients
`with MS may experience sexual dysfunction.” In men with MS,
`symptoms include erectile dysfunction, ejaculatory disorders, and
`difliculty achieving orgasm.”-*7 In women with MS, symptoms
`include reduced libido; reduced, altered, or painful sensations;
`reduced hibrication; difliculty achieving orgasm; and anxiety about
`incontinence.‘“° Nonpharrnacologic treatment options include
`addressing psychophysiologic issues that can contribute to sexual
`dysfunction; pharrnacologic treatments inchide drugs for erectile
`dysfunction and lubricants. Discontinuation of SSRIs associated
`with sexual side effects also may be considered. Alternatives to SSRIS
`include tricyclic antidepressants and monoamine oxidase inhibitors.
`Cognitive dysfunction. Impairment of cognitive prooesses is
`reported by 45% to 65% of patients with MS and is the symptom
`that is of greatest concern to patients.” Cognitive dysfunction
`most often includes impairment in learning and memory, atten-
`tion, and information processing." Nonpharrnacologic cognitive
`rehabilitation is the main treatment option because, currently, no
`medications are approved for the treatment of cognitive impair-
`ment in MS." Because the occurrence or progression of cognitive
`dysfunction is an indicator of active disease, treatment options for
`this symptom are the same as those used to delay the progression
`of the physical symptoms of MS (i.e.,
`IFN[3 and glatiramer
`acetate). IM IFNB-la has been shown to delay progression of
`cognitive dysfunction in patients with MS.”
`
`Use of MRI to Monitor Disease Activity
`
`Subclinical disease activity detected using MRI plays an impor-
`tant role in the longitudinal management of MS. Typically, lesions
`seen on MRI and used to assess disease activity include hyperin-
`tense lesions on T2-weighted images, hypointense lesions on
`T1-weighted images, and gadolinium-enhanced lesions on post-
`contrast
`images. Another measure that
`is being increasingly
`accepted as an important MS outcome is MRI measurement of
`CNS atrophy.” Increase in lesion load and progressive atrophy on
`MRI often may be clinically silent. Because brain MRI can detect
`disease activity that
`is subclinical,
`it
`is considered a more
`sensitive measure of disease activity than clinical findings.“
`Generally, insurance coverage for MRI is available for the pur-
`pose of diagnosis but not necessarily for ongoing disease moni-
`toring. Given that MRI measures can detect asymptomatic wors-
`ening of disease and thus help in making preemptive alterations
`to the treatment plan, it is recommended that MRI be performed
`periodically in patients with MS.
`Ideally, MRI should be per-
`formed every 12 months in patients with MS who are asympto-
`matic and more often (every 6 months) in patients who are
`
` Recommended Magnetic
`Resonance I maging Protocol
`
`Brain, axial
`- T1 noncontrast
`- T1 postcontrast
`- T2
`- Fluid—attenuated inversion recovery (FI_AIR)‘
`Brain, sagittal
`0 T1 noncontrast
`- FLAIR
`Spinal
`0 T1 sagittal
`- T2 sagittal
`- T2 axial
`0 Postcontrast (T1 axial, T1 sagittal)
`
`‘FLAIR is recommended to increase the sensitiviz and sgecificiz 0! hmerinlense MS lesions.
`
`symptomatic. Recommended MRI protocols are shown in Table 1.
`
`Testing for Neutralizing Antibodies
`
`In patients with MS undergoing treatment with IFNfl, fomiation
`of NAbs to IFNB can lead to a loss of efficacy of the drug and sub-
`sequent occurrence of breakthrough disease.”-” Antibodies also
`form against glatiramer acetate, although their clinical significance
`needs to be elucidated.” Early detection of NAbs through period-
`ic testing can make the neurologist aware of the potential for
`recurrence of symptoms in patients who are NAb-positive.
`The 3 different formulations of IFNB are associated with vary-
`ing incidences of NAbs:
`IM IFNB-la, 5%’, SC IFNB-1a, 24%;
`IFNb-1B, 45%. (For a detailed discussion, see the article by
`Howard S. Rossrnan in this supplement.) Consequently, the guide-
`lines for NAb testing depend on which IFNB product is being
`used as the platform drug. For patients using the more immuno-
`genic IFNB products (IFNB-lb and SC IFNB-Ia), testing for NAbs
`should be done at 12 months or if breakthrough disease occurs.
`Patients who are being treated with the less immunogenic
`IM IFNB-la only need to be tested if breakthrough disease occurs.
`The NAbFeron (IFNB) antibody test (Athena Diagnostics) is
`the most commonly used, commercially available assay for NAbs.
`The cytopathic effect assay for NAbs, recommended by the World
`Health Organization, is based on the ability of NAbs in serum to
`interfere with the antiviral effects of IFNB on human lung carci-
`noma cells.” NAbs are quantitatively expressed in neutralizing
`titers (a neutralizing titer is defined by a 50% inhibition of the
`activity of 10 IU/ml IFNB). The threshold for NAb-positivity is
`defined by the presence in patient serum of NAb titers 220. The
`NAb titer appears to influence the persistence of NAbs. Patients
`with NAb titers >100 are more likely to remain NAb-positive for
`years. Patients treated with corticosteroids should not be tested
`for NAbs until 30 days after the last corticosteroid dose because
`corticosteroid treatment can temporarily suppress NAbs.
`For symptomatic patients with high NAb titers (Z20), therapy
`alteration is recommended. For those with high titers who are
`asymptomatic, the NAb test may be repeated in 6 months. If NAbs
`are persistent, then therapy should be altered. For patients with low
`
`“"""““°"'°’g "°“ 1°‘ ”°‘ 3' @””'EXHBI1WU?°%3 I"°"I’fiVg€’3
`
` AMNEAL
`
`

`
`Stepped-care Approach to Treating MS: A Managed Care Treatment Algorithm
`
` Management of Breakthrough Disease
`Using Combination Therapx
`
`drug in patients with breakthrough disease. Further, increasing the
`dose of IFNB or the frequency of administration may lead to
`increased incidences of adverse events and NAbs.°"°‘ In addition, in
`
`patients who develop NAbs to IFN[3, switching between the 3 IFNB
`formulations is not feasible because of the cross—reactivity between
`antibodies to the different IFNB products.“ Thus, the available treat-
`ment options for this chronic disease are reduced.
`Combination therapy (i.e., addition of another agent to the
`platform drug) is the most effective way of managing continued
`breakthrough disease. An ideal agent for combination therapy is
`one that has biologic activity in MS with a mechanism of action
`that differs from the platform drug, provides synergistic efficacy,
`and has a low likelihood of additive toxicity.“ Initially, mainte-
`nance pulse corticosteroids are added to the platform drug to sta-
`bilize breakthrough disease. In patients who require additional
`therapy, corticosteroids are followed by immunosuppressants or
`cytotoxic agents. Oral cytotoxic agents (eg, methotrexate, azathio-
`prine, or mycophenolate mofetil) should be tried first (Stage IIIA)
`with IV cytotoxic agents (e.g., rnitoxantrone and cycIophos-
`phamide) being used as necessary (Stage IIIB). With the exception
`of mitoxantrone, which is approved for use in MS, these agents are
`approved for use in other diseases and are used off-label in the
`treatment of MS.’ Often, a physicians experience with an agent
`and the cost of the drug influences the choice of agent when
`designing a combination therapy regimen.“
`A number of novel irnmunomodulatory agents also are under
`investigation for the treatment of MS, mostly in phase I studies (Table
`2). Phase II clinical trials have been reported with some agents,
`incfuding the nonpeptide chemolcine receptor antagonist, BX-471,
`and the humanized monoclonal antibody to oi4|31-integrin, natal-
`izumab.“-°° Natalizurnab is cunently being studied in phase III trials.
`
`1 Conclusions
`
`One of the fundamental treatment goals in MS is to delay the pro-
`gression of disease and the associated disability and cognitive
`impairment. A stepped-care approach is an effective method for
`achieving this treatment objective and consists of the following:
`(a) initiating therapy with a platform drug in patients diagnosed
`with CDMS or patients with a CIS and at high risk of developing
`CDMS; (b) monitoring disease progression by assessing the sever-
`ity of MS symptoms, noting the presence and number of lesions
`on MRI, and testing for NAbs;
`(c)
`identifying breakthrough
`disease early based on ongoing monitoring of disease activity; and
`(d) managing breakthrough disease.
`
`DISCLOSURES
`
`Acute manage merit:
`- Continue platform therapy (immunomodulator)
`0 Initiate corticosteroids as needed
`
`
`
` Stabilized breakthrough Continued breakthrough
`
`Continue platform therapy
`Continue platform therapy
`_
`plus
`_
`_
`Maintenance pulse corticosteroids
`and/or
`Stage IIIA: oral immunosuppressant
`and/or
`Stage IIIB: IV immunosuppressant
`
`Combination Therapy
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Acute management 0 breakthrough disease involves the use of ulse corticosteroid
`them to stabilize
`e disease and continuing treatment with t efirst—line or
`“plat arm" drug. Continued breakthrough disease re uires addition ofeither
`maintenance pulse corticosteroid therapy or a secondary agent to the platform drug.
`
`titers of NAbs (<20) who are symptomatic, further evaluation and
`follow-up (including retesting in 6 months) should be considered
`before making any alterations to therapy. For asymptomatic
`patients with low NAb titers, no alteration to therapy is needed.
`One of the concerns regarding testing for NAbs is expense. The
`cost of the NAbFeron test is estimated at $600.” However, given
`that yearly costs of IFNB therapy may exoeed $15,000, the benefit
`of identifying NAb-positive patients and switching them to alternate
`treatments is likely to be economically viable in the long term.”
`
`1 Management of Breakthrough Disease
`
`In general, for the purpose of designing a treatment plan, the MS
`disease process can be categorized into 3 stages. Stage I is the early
`part of the disease, Stage II involves acute breakthrough disease on
`treatment, and Stage III is characterized by continued break-
`through disease despite treatment. Depending on their response
`to therapy, and disease fluctuations and progression, patients may
`move from one stage to another and back.
`
`Acute Breakthrough Disease
`
`Management of breakthrough disease in Stage II involves the use
`of pulse corticosteroids. Typically, intravenous (IV) methylpred-
`nisolone 1 g/day is administered over I to 4 hours for 3 to 5
`days.” The platform drug is continued during the management of
`breakthrough disease.
`
`Continued Breakthrough Disease and Combination Therapy
`
`Options available for the management of continued breakthrough
`disease in Stage III are switching from one platform drug to anoth-
`er, changing the dose of the cunent platform drug, and initiating
`combination therapy (Figure 3). No controlled studies have assessed
`the benefits of switching or of increasing the close of the platform
`
`Funding for this paper was provided by Biogen ldec Inc. All authors received
`an honorarium from Biogen; author Ben Johnson has also previously received
`an honorarium from Berlex. Author Sheldon]. Rich does consulting work for
`Biogen and participates in the Biogen and Berlex speakers bureaus; author
`James R. Miller participates in the Biogen lecture bureau; author Howard S.
`Rossman is a consultant and speaker for Biogen, Teva Neuroscience, and
`Serono, Inc., and has received compensation for clinical research from these
`companies.
`
`530 Supplement to Journal of Managed Care Pharmacy
`
`JMCP June 20(
`
`NO. 1
`
`1 Page 5
`
` AMNEAL
`
`

`
`Stepped-Care Approach to Treating MS: A Managed Care Treatment Algorithm
`
` Novel lmmunomodulatory Agents for Use in Combination Therapy for Multiple Sclerosis
`Characteristics
`Reference
`lmmunomodulatory Agent
`Miller et al. 2003.6’
`Natalizumab (Antegren)
`
`Elices; 2002.“
`Brundula et al. 2002."
`Stuve et al. 2003.“
`Weber et al. 1998.“
`Sicotte et al. 2002.”
`Saleh et al. 2000."
`Chou et al. 1994.”
`Correale et al. 2000.”
`Muraro et al. 2003."
`
`Qu et al. 1998.”
`
`BX—471
`
`Minocycline
`Simvastatin (Zocor)
`
`Pentoxifylline
`Estriol
`
`Rituximab (Rituxan )
`
`TCR peptide (NeuroVax)
`T—cell vaccination
`
`Stem cell transplantation
`All-trans retinoic acid
`
`I-Iumanized monoclonal antibody to (14fi1—integrin;
`inhibition of leukocyte adhesion and extravasation
`Nonpeptide chemokine receptor (CCR1) antagonist
`Matrix metalloproteinase inhibition
`lmmunomodulation, Th2 cytokine promotion
`Phosphodiesterase inhibition, suppression of TNFO. and IFNy production
`lmmunomodulation, Th2 shift
`
`Chimeric murindhuman anti- CD20 monoclonal antibody
`Combination of 3 different TCR peptides
`Attenuation of myelin-specific immune responses
`Immunoablation followed by infusion of autologom hematopoietic stem cells
`Potentiation of T suppressor cell function
`
`Author SheldonJ. Rich served as principal author of the study. Study
`concept and design were contributed primarily by Rich and authors Howard
`S. Rossrnan and William H. Stuart. Analysis and interpretation of data were
`contributed by all authors. Drafting of the manuscript was primarily the work
`of Rich, and its critical revision was the work of all authors. Administrative,
`technical, and/or material support was provided by Biogen Idec Inc.
`
`REFERENCES
`
`1. Weinshenker BG, Bass B, Rice GPA, et al. The natural history of multiple
`sclerosis: a geographically based study, 1: clinical course and disability. Brain.
`1989;112:133—46.
`
`2. Galetta SL, Markowitz C, Lee AG. lmmunomodulatory agents for the treat—
`ment of relapsing multiple sclerosis. A systematic review. Arch Intern Med.
`2002;162:2161—69.
`
`3. Kaufman M. Combining therapies with interferon beta for relapsing and
`early progressive MS: a review. Int] MSCare. 2002;4:50—65.
`4. Jacobs LD, Beck RVV, Simon JH, et al. Intramuscular interferon beta—1a
`therapy initiated during a first demyelinating event in multiple sclerosis.
`N EngIJ Med. 2000;343:898—904.
`5. Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L, et al. New diagnostic criteria for multiv
`ple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol. 1983;13:227-31.
`6. Paty DVV, Oger JJF, Kastrukoff LF,

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket