View Single Post
Old 06-18-2008, 06:40 PM
freeinhou's Avatar
freeinhou freeinhou is offline
In Remembrance
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairfield Glade, TN
Posts: 847
15 yr Member
freeinhou freeinhou is offline
In Remembrance
freeinhou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fairfield Glade, TN
Posts: 847
15 yr Member
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lady_express_44 View Post
Efficacy of disease-modifying therapies in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic comparison.


Freedman MS, Hughes B, Mikol DD, Bennett R, Cuffel B, Divan V, LaVallee N, Al-Sabbagh A.
Department of Medicine (Neurology), University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. mfreedman@ottawahospital.on.ca

The treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) has become more effective over the last decade with the advent of the currently available disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). Pivotal clinical studies differ in many characteristics, such that cross-comparisons of relative risk reductions are of limited value and can be misleading.

Our objective was to compare the clinical efficacy of currently approved first-line DMTs in patients with RRMS, applying an evidence-based medicine approach. We reviewed all phase III pivotal trials of DMTs. Six clinical trials of Avonex, Betaseron, Copaxone, Rebif and Tysabri in patients with RRMS were identified for analysis. Only randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind studies were included. The clinical efficacy endpoints compared were: proportion of relapse-free patients at 1 and 2 years; annualized relapse rate at 2 years; proportion of progression-free patients at 2 years, and proportion of patients free of gadolinium-enhancing lesions at 1 year or 9 months.

Based on these analyses, Betaseron, Rebif, and Tysabri show comparable effects, whereas for several endpoints Avonex or Copaxone did not significantly differ from placebo. In the absence of head-to-head studies for all products used to treat RRMS, it still may be possible to compare treatment effects by applying evidence-based medicine principles. (c) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.

PMID: 18437041 [PubMed - in process]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18437041

Cherie
Congratulations. I'm like that guy (the alcoholic) in Independence Day - "I've been telling you for ten long years..."

When beta 1B got approved (betaseron) it was like - why??? Results were basically in line with placebo affect. Then they approved beta 1a (huh?) - avonex and rebif. Then COPII (copaxone). The MS community (at least those on the internet at the time in 1993) were shocked.

Nothing really worked. Ted Yednock's work with monoclonal antibodies seemed to be the only promising thing at the time but all these drugs were getting approved. We were all flabbergasted. Why?

I did enter the Betaseron lottery in 1993 - drew such a high number that I had a 15 month wait. Results from the trials didn't improve so I elected not to take a DMD.

Personal opinion - I've had MS for over 20 years and haven't taken a DMD. I still work/live/play a normal life. This disease is a crap shoot... Ain't no drug gonna help ya. Just bankrupt ya.

Tom
freeinhou is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote