Sequencing of disease-modifying therapies for relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a theoretical approach to optimizing treatment

References

• Noseworthy JH, Lucchinetti C, Rodriguez M, et al. Multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2000;343:938-52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giovannoni G, Butzkueven H, Dhib-Jalbut S, et al. Brain health: time matters in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2016;9(Suppl 1):S5-S48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Havla J, Warnke C, Derfuss T, et al. Interdisciplinary risk management in the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International. 2016;113:879-86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leray E, Yaouanq J, Le Page E, et al. Evidence for a two-stage disability progression in multiple sclerosis. Brain 2010;133(Pt 7):1900-13
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Merkel B, Butzkueven H, Traboulsee AL, et al. Timing of high-efficacy therapy in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review. Autoimmun Rev 2017;16:658-65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giovannoni G, Southam E, Waubant E. Systematic review of disease-modifying therapies to assess unmet needs in multiple sclerosis: tolerability and adherence. Mult Scler 2012;18:932-46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comi G. Induction vs. escalating therapy in multiple sclerosis: practical implications. Neurol Sci 2008;29(Suppl 2):S253-S5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fenu G, Lorefice L, Frau F, et al. Induction and escalation therapies in multiple sclerosis. Antiinflamm Antiallergy Agents Med Chem 2015;14:26-34
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rush CA, MacLean HJ, Freedman MS. Aggressive multiple sclerosis: proposed definition and treatment algorithm. Nat Rev Neurol 2015;11:379-89
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biogen press release on 2 March, 2018. Available at: http://newsroom.biogen.com/press-release/autoimmune-diseases/biogen%C2%A0and-abbvie-announce%C2%A0-voluntary%C2%A0worldwide-withdrawal-marketi [Last accessed 5 March, 2018.]
   Google Scholar
• Gajofatto A, Benedetti MD. Treatment strategies for multiple sclerosis: when to start, when to change, when to stop? World J Clin Cases 2015;3:545-55
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGraw CA, Lublin FD. Interferon beta and glatiramer acetate therapy. Neurotherapeutics 2013;10:2-18
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filippini G, Del Giovane C, Clerico M, et al. Treatment with disease-modifying drugs for people with a first clinical attack suggestive of multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;4:CD012200
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metz LM, Li DKB, Traboulsee AL, et al. Trial of minocycline in a clinically isolated syndrome of multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2017;376:2122-33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller AE, Wolinsky JS, Kappos L, et al. Oral teriflunomide for patients with a first clinical episode suggestive of multiple sclerosis (TOPIC): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Neurol 2014;13:977-86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burness CB, Deeks ED. Dimethyl fumarate: a review of its use in patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. CNS Drugs 2014;28:373-87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulze-Topphoff U, Varrin-Doyer M, Pekarek K, et al. Dimethyl fumarate treatment induces adaptive and innate immune modulation independent of Nrf2. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2016;113:4777-82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox RJ, Miller DH, Phillips JT, et al. Placebo-controlled phase 3 study of oral BG-12 or glatiramer in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1087-97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bar-Or A, Pachner A, Menguy-Vacheron F, et al. Teriflunomide and its mechanism of action in multiple sclerosis. Drugs 2014;74:659-74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vermersch P, Czlonkowska A, Grimaldi LM, et al. Teriflunomide versus subcutaneous interferon beta-1a in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis: a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. Mult Scler 2014;20:705-16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smoot K, Spinelli KJ, Stuchiner T, et al. Three-year clinical outcomes of relapsing multiple sclerosis patients treated with dimethyl fumarate in a United States community health center. Mult Scler 2017: published online 1 May 2017, doi: 10.1177/1352458517709956
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• D’Amico E, Zanghi A, Leone C, et al. Treatment-related progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in multiple sclerosis: a comprehensive review of current evidence and future needs. Drug Saf 2016;39:1163-74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gold R, Kappos L, Arnold DL, et al. Placebo-controlled phase 3 study of oral BG-12 for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1098-107
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox EJ, Vasquez A, Grainger W, et al. Gastrointestinal tolerability of delayed-release dimethyl fumarate in a multicenter, open-label study of patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MANAGE). Int J MS Care 2016;18:9-18
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Edwards K, Hendin Travis L, Okai A, et al. The clinical course of hair thinning associated with teriflunomide: case series of patients who participated in a hair photography project (P7.016). Neurology 2015;84(14 Suppl)
   Google Scholar
• He A, Spelman T, Jokubaitis V, et al. Comparison of switch to fingolimod or interferon beta/glatiramer acetate in active multiple sclerosis. JAMA Neurol 2015;72:405-13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bevan CJ, Cree BA. Disease activity free status: a new end point for a new era in multiple sclerosis clinical research? JAMA Neurol 2014;71:269-70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kappos L, De Stefano N, Freedman MS, et al. Inclusion of brain volume loss in a revised measure of ‘no evidence of disease activity’ (NEDA-4) in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2016;22:1297-305
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matta AP, Nascimento OJ, Ferreira AC, et al. No evidence of disease activity in multiple sclerosis patients. Expert Rev Neurother 2016;16:1279-84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nixon R, Bergvall N, Tomic D, et al. No evidence of disease activity: indirect comparisons of oral therapies for the treatment of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Adv Ther 2014;31:1134-54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banwell B, Giovannoni G, Hawkes C, et al. Editors’ welcome and a working definition for a multiple sclerosis cure. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2013;2:65-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alroughani R, Deleu D, El Salem K, et al. A regional consensus recommendation on brain atrophy as an outcome measure in multiple sclerosis. BMC Neurol 2016;16:240
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giovannoni G, Tomic D, Bright JR, et al. “No evident disease activity”: the use of combined assessments in the management of patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2017;23:1179-87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sormani MP, De Stefano N. Defining and scoring response to IFN-[beta] in multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Neurol 2013;9:504-12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Mantia L, Di Pietrantonj C, Rovaris M, et al. Interferons-beta versus glatiramer acetate for relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;11:CD009333
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Al-Hashel J, Ahmed SF, Behbehani R, et al. Real-world use of fingolimod in patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: a retrospective study using the national multiple sclerosis registry in Kuwait. CNS Drugs 2014;28:817-24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alsop J, Medin J, Cornelissen C, et al. Two studies in one: a propensity-score-matched comparison of fingolimod versus interferons and glatiramer acetate using real-world data from the independent German studies, PANGAEA and PEARL. PLoS One 2017;12:e0173353
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alsop JC, Bergvall N, Cornelissen C, et al. Confirmed disability improvement in patients with active multiple sclerosis treated with fingolimod versus brace: a matched comparison of treatments from the Pangaea and Pearl registry studies. Value Health 2015;18:A750
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baroncini D, Zaffaroni M, Annovazzi PO, et al. A real world experience with fingolimod in active RRMS patients naïve to second-line agents: a 2 years, intention-to-treat, observational, single center study. Mult Scler Demyelinating Disord 2016;1:4
   Google Scholar
• Belachew S, Phan-Ba R, Bartholome E, et al. Natalizumab induces a rapid improvement of disability status and ambulation after failure of previous therapy in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 2011;18:240-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castillo-Trivino T, Mowry EM, Gajofatto A, et al. Switching multiple sclerosis patients with breakthrough disease to second-line therapy. PLoS One 2011;6:e16664
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen JA, Barkhof F, Comi G, et al. Oral fingolimod or intramuscular interferon for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2010;362:402-15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen JA, Coles AJ, Arnold DL, et al. Alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a as first-line treatment for patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2012;380:1819-28.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen JA, Khatri B, Barkhof F, et al. Long-term (up to 4.5 years) treatment with fingolimod in multiple sclerosis: results from the extension of the randomised TRANSFORMS study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016;87:468-75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hauser SL, Bar-Or A, Comi G, et al. Ocrelizumab versus Interferon Beta-1a in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2017;376:221-34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putzki N, Kollia K, Woods S, et al. Natalizumab is effective as second line therapy in the treatment of relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 2009;16:424-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziemssen T, De Stefano N, Pia Sormani M, et al. Optimizing therapy early in multiple sclerosis: an evidence-based view. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2015;4:460-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen JA, Chun J. J. Ann Neurol 2011;69:759–77
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Nazareth T, Zhou H, et al. Real world relapse rates of glatiramer acetate patients switching to fingolimod or interferon beta-1a versus remaining on glatiramer acetate (P6.181). Neurology 2016;86(16 Suppl)
   Google Scholar
• Cree B, Wynn D, Cascione M, et al. Key results from PREFERMS: real-world patient retention and outcomes on fingolimod versus platform injectable disease-modifying therapies in early relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (P3.115). Neurology 2016;86(16 Suppl)
   Google Scholar
• Ticha V, Kodym R, Pocikova Z, et al. Real-world outcomes in fingolimod-treated patients with multiple sclerosis in the Czech Republic: results from the 12-month GOLEMS study. Clin Drug Investig 2017;37:175-86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalincik T, Brown JWL, Robertson N, et al. Treatment effectiveness of alemtuzumab compared with natalizumab, fingolimod, and interferon beta in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2017;16:271-81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hersh CM, Love TE, Cohn S, et al. Comparative efficacy and discontinuation of dimethyl fumarate and fingolimod in clinical practice at 12-month follow-up. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2016;10:44-52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hersh C, Bandyopadhyay A, Cohn S, et al. Comparative efficacy and discontinuation of dimethyl fumarate and fingolimod in clinical practice at 24-month follow-up. Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin 2017;3:doi: 2055217317715485
   Google Scholar
• Vu N, Bradshaw M, Moses H, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of fingolimod, dimethylfumarate, and teriflunomide in patients with multiple sclerosis: real world experience from a single center (P6.168). Neurology 2016;86(16 Suppl)
   Google Scholar
• DiMarco JP, O’Connor P, Cohen JA, et al. First-dose effects of fingolimod: pooled safety data from three phase 3 studies. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2014;3:629-38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes B, Cascione M, Freedman MS, et al. First-dose effects of fingolimod after switching from injectable therapies in the randomized, open-label, multicenter, Evaluate Patient OutComes (EPOC) study in relapsing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2014;3:620-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Limmroth V, Ziemssen T, Lang M, et al. Electrocardiographic assessments and cardiac events after fingolimod first dose – a comprehensive monitoring study. BMC Neurol 2017;17:11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kappos L, Cohen J, Collins W, et al. Fingolimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis: an integrated analysis of safety findings. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2014;3:494-504
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calabresi PA, Radue EW, Goodin D, et al. Safety and efficacy of fingolimod in patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (FREEDOMS II): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Neurol 2014;13:545-56
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lublin F, Miller DH, Freedman MS, et al. Oral fingolimod in primary progressive multiple sclerosis (INFORMS): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2016;387:1075-84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khatri BO. Fingolimod in the treatment of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: long-term experience and an update on the clinical evidence. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 2016;9:130-47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonseca J. Fingolimod real world experience: efficacy and safety in clinical practice. Neurosci J 2015;2015:389360
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berger JR, Cree BA, Greenberg B, et al. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy after fingolimod treatment. Neurology 2018. In press
   Google Scholar
• Achtnichts L, Obreja O, Conen A, et al. Cryptococcal meningoencephalitis in a patient with multiple sclerosis treated with fingolimod. JAMA Neurol 2015;72:1203-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grebenciucova E, Reder AT, Bernard JT. Immunologic mechanisms of fingolimod and the role of immunosenescence in the risk of cryptococcal infection: a case report and review of literature. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2016;9:158-62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward MD, Jones DE, Goldman MD. Cryptococcal meningitis after fingolimod discontinuation in a patient with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2016;9:47-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Francis G, Kappos L, O’Connor P, et al. Temporal profile of lymphocyte counts and relationship with infections with fingolimod therapy. Mult Scler 2014;20:471-80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilenya [prescribing information]. East Hanover, NJ: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, 2017. Available at: https://www.pharma.us.novartis.com/sites/www.pharma.us.novartis.com/files/gilenya.pdf [Last accessed 11 March 2018]
   Google Scholar
• Int P. Teriflunomide (AUBAGIO). Multiple sclerosis: just a metabolite of leflunomide. Prescrire International 2015;24:61-4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Willis M, Pearson O, Illes Z, et al. An observational study of alemtuzumab following fingolimod for multiple sclerosis. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2017;4:e320
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linker R, Bayas A, Constantinidis A, et al. Safety and efficacy of alemtuzumab after switching from fingolimod: a German multi-center experience over one year (P6.184). Neurology 2016;86(16 Suppl)
   Google Scholar
• Butzkueven HKL, Kappos L, Trojano M, et al. Disease course in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients switching from fingolimod to natalizumab. Neurology 2015;84(14 Suppl):P3.284
   Google Scholar
• Vermersch P, Radue EW, Putzki N, et al. A comparison of multiple sclerosis disease activity after discontinuation of fingolimod and placebo. Mult Scler J Experimental Translational Clin 2017;3:2055217317730096
   Google Scholar
• Polman CH, O’Connor PW, Havrdova E, et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006;354:899-910
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butzkueven H, Kappos L, Trojano M, et al. Real-world safety and efficacy of natalizumab after switching from other disease-modifying therapies (DMTs): data from the Tysabri Observational Program (TOP) (P2.069). Neurology 2016;86(16 Suppl)
   Google Scholar
• Sangalli F, Moiola L, Bucello S, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of natalizumab in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis patients: a post-marketing observational study. Neurol Sci 2011;31(Suppl 3):299-302
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Baroncini D, Ghezzi A, Annovazzi PO, et al. Natalizumab versus fingolimod in patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis non-responding to first-line injectable therapies. Mult Scler 2016;22:1315-26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalincik T, Horakova D, Spelman T, et al. Switch to natalizumab versus fingolimod in active relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2015;77:425-35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koch-Henriksen N, Magyari M, Sellebjerg F, et al. A comparison of multiple sclerosis clinical disease activity between patients treated with natalizumab and fingolimod. Mult Scler 2017;23:234-41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McCormack PL. Natalizumab: a review of its use in the management of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Drugs 2013;73:1463-81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selewski DT, Shah GV, Segal BM, et al. Natalizumab (Tysabri). Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:1588-90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho PR, Koendgen H, Campbell N, et al. Risk of natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in patients with multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of data from four clinical studies. Lancet Neurol 2017;16:925-33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloomgren G, Richman S, Hotermans C, et al. Risk of natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. N Engl J Med 2012;366:1870-80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutter GR, Stuve O. Does risk stratification decrease the risk of natalizumab-associated PML? Where is the evidence? Mult Scler 2014;20:1304-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werner MH, Huang D. Natalizumab-treated patients at high risk for PML persistently excrete JC polyomavirus. J Neurovirol 2016;22:871-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwab N, Schneider-Hohendorf T, Pignolet B, et al. Therapy with natalizumab is associated with high JCV seroconversion and rising JCV index values. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2016;3:e195
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor PW, Goodman A, Kappos L, et al. Disease activity return during natalizumab treatment interruption in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2011;76:1858-65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giovannoni G, Marta M, Davis A, et al. Switching patients at high risk of PML from natalizumab to another disease-modifying therapy. Pract Neurol 2016;16:389-93
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jokubaitis VG, Li V, Kalincik T, et al. Fingolimod after natalizumab and the risk of short-term relapse. Neurology 2014;82:1204-11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kappos L, Radue EW, Comi G, et al. Switching from natalizumab to fingolimod: a randomized, placebo-controlled study in RRMS. Neurology 2015;85:29-39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen M, Maillart E, Tourbah A, et al. Switching from natalizumab to fingolimod in multiple sclerosis: a French prospective study. JAMA Neurol 2014;71:436-41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox RJ, Cree BA, De Seze J, et al. MS disease activity in RESTORE: a randomized 24-week natalizumab treatment interruption study. Neurology 2014;82:1491-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naegelin Y, Rasenack M, Sanderson N, et al. An observational study evaluating disease control, safety, and immunological changes in patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis switching from previous treatment with natalizumab to fingolimod (SWITCH-UHBS). Mult Scler J 2013;19:460
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malucchi S, Capobianco M, Lo Re M, et al. High-risk PML patients switching from natalizumab to alemtuzumab: an observational study. Neurol Ther 2017;6:145-52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LaGanke C, Adcock A. Clinical outcomes of 200 multiple sclerosis patients switching from natalizumab to alemtuzumab in a single United States MS center (P3.117). Neurology 2016;86(16 Suppl)
   Google Scholar
• Martin-Blondel G, Bauer J, Cuvinciuc V, et al. In situ evidence of JC virus control by CD8+ T cells in PML-IRIS during HIV infection. Neurology 2013;81:964-70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedman MS, Kaplan JM, Markovic-Plese S. Insights into the mechanisms of the therapeutic efficacy of alemtuzumab in multiple sclerosis. J Clin Cell Immunol 2013;4. pii:1000152.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cohen JA, Coles AJ, Arnold DL, et al. Alemtuzumab versus interferon beta 1a as first-line treatment for patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2012;380:1819-28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coles AJ, Twyman CL, Arnold DL, et al. Alemtuzumab for patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis after disease-modifying therapy: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 2012;380:1829-39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruck T, Bittner S, Wiendl H, et al. Alemtuzumab in multiple sclerosis: mechanism of action and beyond. Int J Mol Sci 2015;16:16414-39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costelloe L, Jones J, Coles A. Secondary autoimmune diseases following alemtuzumab therapy for multiple sclerosis. Expert Rev Neurother 2012;12:335-41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger T, Elovaara I, Fredrikson S, et al. Alemtuzumab use in clinical practice: recommendations from European multiple sclerosis experts. CNS Drugs 2017;31:33-50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuohy O, Costelloe L, Bjornson I, et al. Alemtuzumab treatment of multiple sclerosis: long-term safety and efficacy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr 2015;86:208-15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willis MD, Harding KE, Pickersgill TP, et al. Alemtuzumab for multiple sclerosis: long term follow-up in a multi-centre cohort. Mult Scler 2016;22:1215-23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montalban X, Hauser SL, Kappos L, et al. Ocrelizumab versus placebo in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2017;376:209-20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menge T, Dubey D, Warnke C, et al. Ocrelizumab for the treatment of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis. Expert Rev Neurother 2016;16:1131-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen DR, Cohen PL. Living life without B cells: is repeated B-cell depletion a safe and effective long-term treatment plan for rheumatoid arthritis? Int J Clin Rheumtol 2012;7:159-66
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berger JR. Classifying PML risk with disease modifying therapies. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2017;12:59-63
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giovannoni G, Comi G, Cook S, et al. A placebo-controlled trial of oral cladribine for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2010;362:416-26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cladribine. Summary of opinion. CHMP 2017. Available at: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Summary_of_opinion_-_Initial_authorisation/human/004230/WC500229786.pdf [Last accessed 11 March 2018]
   Google Scholar
• Cook S, Vermersch P, Comi G, et al. Safety and tolerability of cladribine tablets in multiple sclerosis: the CLARITY (CLAdRIbine Tablets treating multiple sclerosis orallY) study. Mult Scler 2011;17:578-93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pakpoor J, Disanto G, Altmann DR, et al. No evidence for higher risk of cancer in patients with multiple sclerosis taking cladribine. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2015;2:e158
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkins HL, Bowman M, Allan D, et al. Immunoablation and autologous haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation for aggressive multiple sclerosis: a multicentre single-group phase 2 trial. Lancet 2016;388:576-85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grigoriadis N, Linnebank M, Alexandri N, et al. Considerations on long-term immuno-intervention in the treatment of multiple sclerosis: an expert opinion. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2016;17:2085-95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamann J, Neuner B, Kasper J, et al. Participation preferences of patients with acute and chronic conditions. Health Expectations 2007;10:358-63
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson LS, Loucks A, Gipson G, et al. Patient preferences for attributes of multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapies: development and results of a ratings-based conjoint analysis. Int J MS Care 2015;17:74-82
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arroyo R, Sempere AP, Ruiz-Beato E, et al. Conjoint analysis to understand preferences of patients with multiple sclerosis for disease-modifying therapy attributes in Spain: a cross-sectional observational study. BMJ Open 2017;7:e014433
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patejdl R, Penner IK, Noack TK, et al. Multiple sclerosis and fatigue: a review on the contribution of inflammation and immune-mediated neurodegeneration. Autoimmun Rev 2016;15:210-20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buraga I, Popovici RE. Multiple sclerosis and pregnancy: current considerations. Scientific World J 2014;2014:513160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alroughani R, Altintas A, Al Jumah M, et al. Pregnancy and the use of disease-modifying therapies in patients with multiple sclerosis: benefits versus risks. Mult Scler Int 2016;2016:1034912
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spicher C, Thiel S, Klaaszen-Mielke R, et al. Reversal of relapse pattern during pregnancy in women treated with natalizumab up to pregnancy (P2.096). Neurology 2016;86(16 Suppl)
   Google Scholar
• Hartung DM, Bourdette DN, Ahmed SM, et al. The cost of multiple sclerosis drugs in the US and the pharmaceutical industry: too big to fail? Neurology 2015;84:2185-92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedman MS, Selchen D, Arnold DL, et al. Treatment optimization in MS: Canadian MS Working Group updated recommendations. Can J Neurol Sci 2013;40:307-23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar