alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis

Jian Zhang; Shengliang Shi; Yueling Zhang; Jiefeng Luo; Yousheng Xiao; Lian Meng; Xiaobo Yang

doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010968.pub2

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Alemtuzumab versus interferón beta 1a para la esclerosis múltiple recurrente‐remitente

Información

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010968.pub2 Copiar DOI

Base de datos:

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Versión publicada:

27 noviembre 2017see what's new

Tipo:

Intervention

Etapa:

Review

Grupo Editorial Cochrane:

Grupo Cochrane de Esclerosis múltiple y enfermedades raras del sistema nervioso central

Copyright:

Copyright © 2018 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

Jian Zhang

Department of Neurology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China
Shengliang Shi

Correspondencia a: Department of Neurology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China

[email protected]

[email protected]
Yueling Zhang

Department of Neurology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China
Jiefeng Luo

Department of Neurology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China
Yousheng Xiao

Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China
Lian Meng

Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, China
Xiaobo Yang

Department of Occupational Health and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China

Contributions of authors

JZ, YX, SS drafted the review.

JZ, YX, SS developed the search strategy.

JZ, YX, JL selected relevant articles for inclusion.

JZ, YX, JL extracted the data from included studies.

JZ, JL assessed the risk of bias in included studies.

YZ, YX entered data to Review Manager 5.

JZ, YX, XY carried out the analysis.

JZ, YZ interpreted the results.

JZ, YZ will update the review.

All review authors read and approved the completed review.

Sources of support

Internal sources

Department of Neurology, the Second Affiliated Hospital, Guangxi Medical University, China.

External sources

No sources of support supplied

Declarations of interest

JZ: none.

SS: none.

YZ: none.

JL: none.

YX: none.

LM: none.

XY: none.

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr Shi for his contribution during the preparation of the review. We thank all peer reviewers for their constructive suggestions and comments in this review. We acknowledge the help and support of Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Review Group editorial team, who provided comments to improve the review. We also thank Taixiang Wu, Guanjian Liu and Youping Li (the Chinese Cochrane centre) for their advice in preparing this review. We are very grateful to the investigators of the trials who provided additional unpublished information.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2017 Nov 27

alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis

Review

Jian Zhang, Shengliang Shi, Yueling Zhang, Jiefeng Luo, Yousheng Xiao, Lian Meng, Xiaobo Yang

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010968.pub2

2014 Feb 11

Alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis

Protocol

Jian Zhang, Yousheng Xiao, Lian Meng, Xiaobo Yang, Shengliang Shi

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010968

Differences between protocol and review

One of the coauthors of the protocol could no longer contribute to the review (Meng L), and two new coauthors (Luo J, Zhang Y) contributed to the review instead.

We planned the following subgroup analyses at the protocol stage but did not perform them due to lack of included studies: different cointerventions, different types of IFN beta 1a.

Keywords

MeSH

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) Keywords

Medical Subject Headings Check Words

Humans;

PICO

Population

Intervention

Comparison

Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Number of participants experiencing at least one relapse at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Number of participants experiencing at least one relapse at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Number of participants whose disease progressed at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Number of participants whose disease progressed at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Number of participants with at least one adverse event at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Number of participants with at least one adverse event at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Number of participants with severe adverse events at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Number of participants with severe adverse events at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Mean Expanded Disability Status Scale score change from baseline at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Mean Expanded Disability Status Scale score change from baseline at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Number of participants with new T2‐hyperintense lesions on magnetic resonance imaging at 24 and 36 months, Outcome 1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Number of participants experiencing treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events, Outcome 1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Number of participants experiencing treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events, Outcome 2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Alemtuzumab 12 mg compared to interferon beta 1a for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis

alemtuzumab12 mg compared to interferon beta 1a for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis
Patient or population: patients with relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis Settings: Intervention: alemtuzumab 12 mg Comparison: interferon beta 1a
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	No of Participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Interferon beta 1a	alemtuzumab12 mg
Number of participants experiencing at least one relapse Follow‐up: 24‐36 months	448 per 1000	269 per 1000 (233 to 314)	RR 0.6 (0.52 to 0.70)	1414 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate¹
Number of participants whose disability worsened Follow‐up: 24‐36 months	168 per 1000	101 per 1000 (76 to 133)	RR 0.6 (0.45 to 0.79)	1414 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,2
Number of participants with at least one adverse event Follow‐up: 24‐36 months	948 per 1000	976 per 1000 (929 to 1000)	RR 1.03 (0.98 to 1.08)	1415 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,3
Number of participants with serious adverse events Follow‐up: 24‐36 months	192 per 1000	197 per 1000 (157 to 247)	RR 1.03 (0.82 to 1.29)	1415 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate¹
Mean Expanded Disability Status Scale score change from baseline Follow‐up: 24‐36 months	The mean EDSS score in the control groups ranged from ‐0.14 to 0.38	Mean EDSS score in the intervention groups was 0.35 lower (0.73 lower to 0.03 higher)		1414 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,4
Number of participants with new T2‐hyperintense lesions on magnetic resonance imaging Follow‐up: 24 months	630 per 1000	472 per 1000 (384 to 585)	RR 0.75 (0.61 to 0.93)	1125 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,5
Number of participants experiencing treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events Follow‐up: 24‐36 months	76 per 1000	25 per 1000 (14 to 43)	RR 0.33 (0.19 to 0.56)	1414 (3 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,6
*The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). The assumed risk in the comparison group is the median control group risk across studies. CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
¹ Downgraded one level due to study limitation (blinding of participants and personnel could not be well performed). ² Downgraded for one level due to inconsistency (I² = 66%) ³ Downgraded for one level due to inconsistency (I² = 85%) ⁴ Downgraded one level due to inconsistency (high heterogeneity, I² = 88%) ⁵ Downgraded one level due to inconsistency (high heterogeneity, I² = 73%). ⁶Downgraded one level due to imprecision (low number of events).

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Alemtuzumab 12 mg compared to interferon beta 1a for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Summary of findings 2. Alemtuzumab 24 mg compared to interferon beta 1a for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis

alemtuzumab24 mg compared to interferon beta 1a for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis
Patient or population: patients with relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis Settings: Intervention: alemtuzumab 24 mg Comparison: interferon beta 1a
Outcomes	*Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)**		Relative effect (95% CI)	No of Participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Interferon beta 1a	alemtuzumab24 mg
Number of participants experiencing at least one relapse Follow‐up: 36 months	405 per 1000	154 per 1000 (93 to 251)	RR 0.38 (0.23 to 0.62)	221 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,2	Single study estimate
Number of participants whose disability worsened Follow‐up: 36 months	216 per 1000	91 per 1000 (45 to 182)	RR 0.42 (0.21 to 0.84)	221 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,2	Single study estimate
Number of participants with at least one adverse event Follow‐up: 24‐36 months	964 per 1000	984 per 1000 (926 to 1000)	RR 1.02 (0.96 to 1.08)	578 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low^1,3
Number of participants with serious adverse events Follow‐up: 24‐36 months	220 per 1000	209 per 1000 (154 to 288)	RR 0.95 (0.7 to 1.31)	578 (2 studies)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate¹
Mean Expanded Disability Status Scale score change from baseline Follow‐up: 36 months	Mean EDSS score in the control group was 0.38 higher	Mean EDSS score in the intervention group was 0.45 lower		221 (1 study)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low^1,4	Single study estimate
Number of participants experiencing treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events Follow‐up: 24‐36 months	89 per 1000	30 per 1000 (9 to 14)	RR 0.34 (0.10 to 1.16)	593 (2 studies)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low^1,2,3
*The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). The assumed risk in the comparison group is the median control group risk across studies. CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
¹ Downgraded one level due to study limitation (blinding of participants and personnel could not be well performed). ² Downgraded one level due to imprecision (low number of events). ³ Downgraded one level due to inconsistency (high heterogeneity, I² = 86%.) ⁴ Imprecision (‐2): In view of the low number of participants and the wide confidence intervals, we downgraded by two points.

Summary of findings 2. Alemtuzumab 24 mg compared to interferon beta 1a for relapsing‐remitting multiple sclerosis

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 1. Number of participants experiencing at least one relapse at 24 and 36 months

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	3	1414	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.60 [0.52, 0.70]

1.1 At 24 months	2	1191	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.62 [0.53, 0.72]
1.2 At 36 months	1	223	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.53 [0.35, 0.80]
2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	1	221	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.38 [0.23, 0.62]

2.1 At 36 months	1	221	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.38 [0.23, 0.62]

Comparison 1. Number of participants experiencing at least one relapse at 24 and 36 months

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 2. Number of participants whose disease progressed at 24 and 36 months

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	3	1414	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.60 [0.45, 0.79]

1.1 At 24 months	2	1191	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.68 [0.50, 0.92]
1.2 At 36 months	1	223	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.33 [0.16, 0.70]
2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	1	221	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.42 [0.21, 0.84]

2.1 At 36 months	1	221	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.42 [0.21, 0.84]

Comparison 2. Number of participants whose disease progressed at 24 and 36 months

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 3. Number of participants with at least one adverse event at 24 and 36 months

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	3	1415	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.03 [0.98, 1.08]

1.1 At 24 months	2	1200	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.04 [1.01, 1.07]
1.2 At 36 months	1	215	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.0 [0.98, 1.02]
2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	2	578	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.02 [0.96, 1.08]

2.1 At 24 months	1	363	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.04 [1.01, 1.08]
2.2 At 36 months	1	215	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.99 [0.97, 1.02]

Comparison 3. Number of participants with at least one adverse event at 24 and 36 months

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 4. Number of participants with severe adverse events at 24 and 36 months

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	3	1415	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.03 [0.82, 1.29]

1.1 At 24 months	2	1200	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.04 [0.81, 1.34]
1.2 At 36 months	1	215	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.99 [0.60, 1.63]
2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	2	578	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.95 [0.70, 1.31]

2.1 At 24 months	1	363	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.86 [0.56, 1.30]
2.2 At 36 months	1	215	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.11 [0.69, 1.80]

Comparison 4. Number of participants with severe adverse events at 24 and 36 months

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 5. Mean Expanded Disability Status Scale score change from baseline at 24 and 36 months

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	3	1414	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.35 [‐0.73, 0.03]

1.1 At 24 months	2	1191	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.20 [‐0.60, 0.20]
1.2 At 36 months	1	223	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.7 [‐1.04, ‐0.36]
2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	1	221	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.83 [‐1.17, ‐0.49]

2.1 At 36 months	1	221	Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	‐0.83 [‐1.17, ‐0.49]

Comparison 5. Mean Expanded Disability Status Scale score change from baseline at 24 and 36 months

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 6. Number of participants with new T2‐hyperintense lesions on magnetic resonance imaging at 24 and 36 months

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	2	1125	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.75 [0.61, 0.93]

1.1 At 24 months	2	1125	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.75 [0.61, 0.93]

Comparison 6. Number of participants with new T2‐hyperintense lesions on magnetic resonance imaging at 24 and 36 months

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 7. Number of participants experiencing treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Alemtuzumab 12 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	3	1414	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.33 [0.19, 0.56]

1.1 At 24 months	2	1191	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.37 [0.20, 0.66]
1.2 At 36 months	1	223	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.23 [0.07, 0.78]
2 Alemtuzumab 24 mg vs interferon beta 1a Show forest plot	2	593	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.34 [0.10, 1.16]

2.1 At 24 months	1	372	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.55 [0.23, 1.33]
2.2 At 36 months	1	221	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.16 [0.04, 0.67]

Comparison 7. Number of participants experiencing treatment discontinuation caused by adverse events

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

The Cochrane Library

Scolaris Language Selector Scolaris Language Selector

Idioma de la Revisión Cochrane

Idioma de la web

Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Alemtuzumab versus interferón beta 1a para la esclerosis múltiple recurrente‐remitente

Información