The accepted standard treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis consists of medications for disease symptoms, including treatment for acute exacerbations. However, currently there is no therapy that alters the progression of physical disability associated with this disease. The purpose of this study was to determine whether interferon beta-1a could slow the progressive, irreversible, neurological disability of relapsing multiple sclerosis. Three hundred one patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis were randomized into a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III trial of interferon beta-1a. Interferon beta-1a, 6.0 million units (30 micrograms¿, was administered by intramuscular injection weekly. The primary outcome variable was time to sustained disability progression of at least 1.0 point on the Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Interferon beta-1a treatment produced a significant delay in time to sustained EDSS progression (p = 0.02). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the proportion of patients progressing by the end of 104 weeks was 34.9% in the placebo group and 21.9% in the interferon beta-1a-treated group. Patients treated with interferon beta-1a also had significantly fewer exacerbations (p = 0.03) and a significantly lower number and volume of gadolinium-enhanced brain lesions on magnetic resonance images (p-values ranging between 0.02 and 0.05). Over 2 years, the annual exacerbation rate was 0.90 in placebo-treated patients versus 0.61 in interferon beta-1a-treated patients. There were no major adverse events related to treatment. Interferon beta-1a had a significant beneficial impact in relapsing multiple sclerosis patients by reducing the accumulation of permanent physical disability, exacerbation frequency, and disease activity measured by gadolinium-enhanced lesions on brain magnetic resonance images. This treatment may alter the fundamental course of relapsing multiple sclerosis.

Objective: To determine whether glatiramer acetate (GA) slows accumulation of disability in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Methods: A total of 943 patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis were randomized to GA or placebo (PBO) in this 3-year, double-blind trial. The primary end point was an intention-to-treat analysis of time to 1-(entry expanded disability status scale, 3.0 -5.0) or 0.5-point expanded disability status scale change (entry expanded disability status scale, 5.5-6.5) sustained for 3 months. The trial was stopped after an interim analysis by an independent data safety monitoring board indicated no discernible treatment effect on the primary outcome. Intention-to-treat analyses of disability and magnetic resonance imaging end points were performed. Results: There was a nonsignificant delay in time to sustained accumulated disability in GA-versus PBO-treated patients (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.07]; p ϭ 0.1753), with significant decreases in enhancing lesions in year 1 and smaller increases in T2 lesion volumes in years 2 and 3 versus PBO. Post hoc analysis showed that survival curves for GA-treated male patients diverged early from PBO-treated male subjects (hazard ratio, 0.71 [95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.95]; p ϭ 0.0193). Interpretation:The trial failed to demonstrate a treatment effect of GA on primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Both the unanticipated low event rate and premature discontinuation of study medication decreased the power to detect a treatment effect. Post hoc analysis suggests GA may have slowed clinical progression in male patients who showed more rapid progression when untreated.

Extension of the interval between vaccine doses for the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine was introduced in the UK to accelerate population coverage with a single dose. At this time, trial data was lacking, and we addressed this in a study of UK healthcare workers. The first vaccine dose induced protection from infection from the circulating alpha (B.1.1.7) variant over several weeks. In a sub-study of 589 individuals, we show that this single dose induces SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody (NAb) responses and a sustained B and T cell response to spike protein. NAb levels were higher after the extended dosing interval (6-14 weeks) compared to the conventional 3-4 week regimen, accompanied by enrichment of CD4 + T cells expressing IL2. Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection amplified and accelerated the response. These data on dynamic cellular and humoral responses indicate that extension of the dosing interval is an effective, immunogenic protocol.

Objective:To examine the pricing trajectories in the United States of disease-modifying therapies (DMT) for multiple sclerosis (MS) over the last 20 years and assess the influences on rising prices.Methods:We estimated the trend in annual drug costs for 9 DMTs using published drug pricing data from 1993 to 2013. We compared changes in DMT costs to general and prescription drug inflation during the same period. We also compared the cost trajectories for first-generation MS DMTs interferon (IFN)–β-1b, IFN-β-1a IM, and glatiramer acetate with contemporaneously approved biologic tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors.Results:First-generation DMTs, originally costing $8,000 to $11,000, now cost about $60,000 per year. Costs for these agents have increased annually at rates 5 to 7 times higher than prescription drug inflation. Newer DMTs commonly entered the market with a cost 25%–60% higher than existing DMTs. Significant increases in the cost trajectory of the first-generation DMTs occurred following the Food and Drug Administration approvals of IFN-β-1a SC (2002) and natalizumab (reintroduced 2006) and remained high following introduction of fingolimod (2010). Similar changes did not occur with TNF inhibitor biologics during these time intervals. DMT costs in the United States currently are 2 to 3 times higher than in other comparable countries.Conclusions:MS DMT costs have accelerated at rates well beyond inflation and substantially above rates observed for drugs in a similar biologic class. There is an urgent need for clinicians, payers, and manufacturers in the United States to confront the soaring costs of DMTs.