Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31832116›Full record

ReviewThe EPMA journal2019

Suggestions for improving the design of clinical trials in multiple sclerosis-results of a systematic analysis of completed phase III trials.

Sinje Gehr, Thomas Kaiser, Reinhold Kreutz, Wolf-Dieter Ludwig, Friedemann Paul

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The EPMA journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Comparative effectiveness and safety of ozanimodTherapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Intertwined like a double helix: A meta-synthesis of the qualitative literature examining the experiences of living with someone with multiple sclerosis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Review
  12. Escalation vs. Early Intense Therapy in Multiple Sclerosis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Fingolimod Therapy in Multiple Sclerosis Leads to the Enrichment of a Subpopulation of Aged NK Cells.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Theranostics · 2021
    Article
  19. 'It struck at the heart of who I thought I was': A meta-synthesis of the qualitative literature examining the experiences of people with multiple sclerosis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sinje Gehr1Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7589-9119
Thomas Kaiser2Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen (Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care) (IQWiG), Im Mediapark 8, 50670 Köln, Germany.
Reinhold Kreutz1Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
Wolf-Dieter Ludwig3Arzneimittelkommission der deutschen Ärzteschaft (Drug Commission of the German Medical Association), Herbert-Lewin-Platz 1, 10623 Berlin, Germany.
Friedemann Paul1Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6378-0070

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This manuscript reviews the primary and secondary endpoints of pivotal phase III trials with immunomodulatory drugs in multiple sclerosis (MS). Considering the limitations of previous trial designs, we propose new standards for the planning of clinical trials, taking into account latest insights into MS pathophysiology and patient-relevant aspects. Using a systematic overview of published phase III (pivotal) trials performed as part of application for drug market approval, we evaluate the following characteristics: trial duration, number of trial participants, comparators, and endpoints (primary, secondary, magnetic resonance imaging outcome, and patient-reported outcomes). From a patient perspective, the primary and secondary endpoints of clinical trials are only partially relevant. High-quality trial data pertaining to efficacy and safety that stretch beyond the time frame of pivotal trials are almost non-existent. Understanding of long-term benefits and risks of disease-modifying MS therapy is largely lacking. Concrete proposals for the trial designs of relapsing (remitting) multiple sclerosis/clinically isolated syndrome, primary progressive multiple sclerosis, and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (e.g., study duration, mechanism of action, and choice of endpoints) are presented based on the results of the systematic overview. Given the increasing number of available immunotherapies, the therapeutic strategy in MS has shifted from a mere "relapse-prevention" approach to a personalized provision of medical care as to the choice of the appropriate drugs and their sequential application over the course of the disease. This personalized provision takes patient preferences as well as disease-related factors into consideration such as objective clinical and radiographic findings but also very burdensome symptoms such as fatigue, depression, and cognitive impairment. Future trial designs in MS will have to assign higher relevance to these patient-reported outcomes and will also have to implement surrogate measures that can serve as predictive markers for individual treatment response to new and investigational immunotherapies. This is an indispensable prerequisite to maximize the benefit of individual patients when participating in clinical trials. Moreover, such appropriate trial designs and suitable enrolment criteria that correspond to the mode of action of the study drug will facilitate targeted prevention of adverse events, thus mitigating risks for individual study participants.

Indexed as

Clinical trialCognitive impairmentComparatorCriteriaDepressionFatigueImmunomodulatory drugsImmunotherapyMitigationMultiple sclerosisPatient benefitsPatient preferencesPatient-reported outcome measures (PROM)Patient stratificationPersonalized provision of medical carePhase IIIPredictive preventive personalised medicinePredictive surrogate measuresRelapse-prevention approachRisk analysisTargeted prevention

Identifiers

PMID31832116
PMCPMC6883016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.