Benefit-Risk Analysis of Glatiramer Acetate for Relapsing-Remitting and Clinically Isolated Syndrome Multiple Sclerosis

Clinical Therapeutics

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2012, Pages

  Qizilbash, Nawab ^a,b,c   Mendez, Ignacio ^a   Sanchez de La Rosa, Rainel ^d  

^a OXON Epidemiology   (Spain)

^b London University ^*

^c IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS   (Israel)

Author keywords

Adverse events; Benefit risk; Cohorts; Disproportionality analysis; Epidemiology; Glatiramer acetate; Meta analysis; Trials

Indexed keywords

ALPHA1 INTERFERON; BETA1 INTERFERON; BETA1A INTERFERON; GLATIRAMER; INTERFERON BETA SERINE; REBIF 22; REBIF 44; REBIF NEUE FORMULIERUNG; RONBETAL; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; URIBETA;

ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK; COCHRANE LIBRARY; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG ERUPTION; DRUG TOLERABILITY; DRUG WITHDRAWAL; EMBASE; ERYTHEMA; HEART PALPITATION; HUMAN; INJECTION SITE NECROSIS; INJECTION SITE REACTION; MEDLINE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; THORAX PAIN; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT INDICATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNSPECIFIED SIDE EFFECT;

EID: 84856163998     PISSN: 01492918     EISSN: 1879114X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2011.12.006     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. Summary of Product Characteristics. Copazone 20mg/ml, solution for injection, pre-filled syringe The electronic Medicines Compendium (eMC), Accessed April 1, 2011. http://www.medicines.org.uk/EMC/medicine/17516/SPC/Copaxone+20mg+ml%2c+Solution+For+Injection%2c+Pre-Filled+Syringe/.
2. Benefit-Risk Methodology Project, 2009. EMA European Medicines Agency, Accessed December 27, 2011. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Report/2011/07/WC500109477.pdf.
3. LaMantia L., Munari L.M., Lovati R. Glatiramer acetate for multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev 2010, 12. CD004678.
4. Smith B., Carson S., Fu R., et al. Drug class review: disease-modifying drugs for multiple sclerosis. Update 1 Accessed January 1, 2011. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK10527/.
5. Francis G.S. Importance of benefit-to-risk assessment for disease-modifying drugs used to treat MS. J Neurol 2004, 251(Suppl 5):V/42-V/49.
6. Johnson F.R., Houtven G.V., Ozdemir S., et al. Multiple sclerosis patients-benefit-risk preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy. J Neurol 2009, 256:554-562.
7. Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 2009, 6:e1000097. PRISMA Group.
8. Loke Y.K., Cavallazzi R., Singh S. Risk of fractures with inhaled corticosteroids in COPD: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Thorax 2011, 66:699-708.
9. Kunz R., Oxman A.D. The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials. BMJ 1998, 317:1185-1190.
10. Vandenbroucke J.P. When are observational studies as credible as randomised trials?. Lancet 2004, 363:1728-1731.
11. Golder S., Loke Y.K., Bland M. Meta-analyses of adverse effects data derived from randomised controlled trials as compared toobservational studies: methodological overview. PLoS Med 2011, 8:e1001026.
12. Papanikolaou P.N., Christidi G.D., Ioannidis J.P. Comparison of evidence on harms of medical interventions in randomized and nonrandomized studies. CMAJ 2006, 174:635-641.
13. Loke Y.K., Derry S. Reporting of adverse drug reactions in randomised controlled trials - a systematic survey. BMC Clin Pharmacol 2001, 1:3.
14. Rief W., Nestoriuc Y., Von Lilienfeld-Toal A., et al. Differences in adverse effect reporting in placebo groups in SSRI and tricyclic antidepressant trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Drug Saf 2009, 32:1041-1056.
15. DuMouchel W. Bayesian data mining in large frequency tables, with an application to the FDA Spontaneous Reporting System. Am Stat 1999, 53:177-202.
16. Szarfman A., Machado S.G., O'Neill R.T. Use of screening algorithms and computer systems to efficiently signal higher-than-expected combinations of drugs and events in the US FDA's spontaneous reports database. Drug Saf 2002, 25:381-392.
17. Jadad A.R., Moore R.A., Carroll D., et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials 1996, 17:1-12.
18. SIGN 50: A guideline developers' handbook The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), Accessed April 1, 2011. http://www.sign.ac.uk/guidelines/fulltext/50/index.html.
19. World Health Organisation Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring World Health Organisation. Vigibase®, Accessed April 1, 2011. http://who-umc.org/DynPage.aspx?id=98082&mn1=7347&mn2=7252&mn3=7322&mn4=7326.
20. The WHO Adverse Reaction Terminology WHO-ART: terminology for coding clinical information in relation to drug therapy World Health Organisation, Accessed April 1, 2011. http://www.umc-products.com/graphics/3149.pdf.
21. Copaxone 20mg/Ml Solution for Injection, Prefilled Syringe. Public Assessment Report Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, Accessed April 1, 2011. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/l-unit1/documents/websiteresources/con025676.pdf.
22. Higgins J.P.T., Thompson S.G. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002, 21:1539-1558.
23. Egger M., Davey Smith G., Schneider M., Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997, 315:629-634.
24. Statistical Software: Release 11.0 2009, StataCorp, Stata Corporation, College Station, Tex.
25. Guo J.J., Pandey S., Doyle J., et al. A review of quantitative risk-benefit methdologies for assessing drug safety and efficacy: report of the ISPOR Risk-Benefit Management Working Group. Value Health 2010, 13:657-666.
26. Mussen F., Salek S., Walker S. Benefit-Risk Appraisal of Medicines. A Systematic Approach to Decision-Making 2009, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom. 2009 ed.
27. Bornstein M.B., Miller A., Slagle S., et al. A pilot trial of Cop 1 in exacerbating-remitting multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 1987, 317:408-414.
28. Cadavid D., Wolansky L.J., Skurnick J., et al. Efficacy of treatment of MS with IFNbeta-1b or glatiramer acetate by monthly brain MRI in the BECOME study. Neurology 2009, 72:1976-1983.
29. Carra A., Onaha P., Sinay V., et al. A retrospective, observational study comparing the four available immunomodulatory treatments for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 2003, 10:671-676.
30. Comi G., Filippi M., Wolinsky J.S. European/Canadian multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of the effects of glatiramer acetate on magnetic resonance imaging-measured disease activity and burden in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. European/Canadian Glatiramer Acetate Study Group. Ann Neurol 2001, 49:290-297.
31. Comi G., Martinelli V., Rodegher M., et al. Effect of glatiramer acetate on conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis in patients with clinically isolated syndrome (PreCISe study): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2009, 374:1503-1511.
32. Flechter S., Vardi J., Pollak L., Rabey J.M. Comparison of glatiramer acetate (Copaxone) and interferon beta-1b (Betaferon) in multiple sclerosis patients: an open-label 2-year follow-up. J Neurol Sci 2002, 197:51-55.
33. Haas J., Firzlaff M. Twenty-four-month comparison of immunomodulatory treatments - a retrospective open label study in 308 RRMS patients treated with beta interferons or glatiramer acetate (Copaxone). Eur J Neurol 2005, 12:425-431.
34. Johnson K.P., Brooks B.R., Cohen J.A., et al. Copolymer 1 reduces relapse rate and improves disability in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: results of a phase III multicenter, double-blind placebo-controlled trial. The Copolymer 1 Multiple Sclerosis Study Group. Neurology 1995, 45:1268-1276.
35. Johnson K.P., Brooks B.R., Cohen J.A., et al. Extended use of glatiramer acetate (Copaxone) is well tolerated and maintains its clinical effect on multiple sclerosis relapse rate and degree of disability. Copolymer 1 Multiple Sclerosis Study Group. Neurology 1998, 50:701-708.
36. Khan O.A., Tselis A.C., Kamholz J.A., et al. A prospective, open-label treatment trial to compare the effect of IFN beta-1a (Avonex), IFNbeta-1b (Betaseron), and glatiramer acetate (Copaxone) on the relapse rate in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 2001, 8:141-148.
37. Mikol D.D., Barkhof F., Chang P., et al. Comparison of subcutaneous interferon beta-1a with glatiramer acetate in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (the REbif vs Glatiramer Acetate in Relapsing MS Disease [REGARD] study): a multicentre, randomised, parallel, open-label trial. Lancet Neurol 2008, 7:903-914.
38. O'Connor P., Filippi M., Arnason B., et al. 250 microg or 500 microg interferon beta-1b versus 20 mg glatiramer acetate in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet Neurol 2009, 8:889-897.
39. Khan O.A., Tselis A.C., Kamholz J.A., et al. A prospective, open-label treatment trial to compare the effect of IFNbeta-1a (Avonex), IFNbeta-1b (Betaseron), and glatiramer acetate (Copaxone) on the relapse rate in relapsing--remitting multiple sclerosis: results after 18 months of therapy. Mult Scler 2001, 7:349-353.
40. Carter N.J., Keating G.M. Glatiramer acetate: a review of its use in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and in delaying the onset of clinically definite multiple sclerosis. Drugs 2010, 70:1545-1577.
41. Bermel R.A., Bakshi R. The measurement and clinical relevance of brain atrophy in multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2006, 5:158-170.
42. Rovaris M., Comi G., Rocca M.A., et al. Short-term brain volume change in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: effect of glatiramer acetate and implications. Brain 2001, 124:1803-1812.