Neurology 2020 04 13;94(15):e1645-e1656. Epub 2020 Mar 13.
From the Department of Neurology (J.P., J.G., O.O., H.Z.) and U995-LIRIC-Lille Inflammation Research International Center, Inserm, Univ Lille (J.G., H.Z.), CHU Lille; Department of Neurology (R.D.), Fondation Ophtalmologique Adolphe de Rothschild, Paris; CNRS, CRMBM UMR 7339 (B.A.), Aix-Marseille Université; Service de Neurologie (B.A.), Pôle de Neurosciences Cliniques, APHM, Hôpital de la Timone, Marseille; Department of Neurology (J.C.), Hôpital Purpan, CHU de Toulouse; Department of Neurology (E.M., C.P.), Hôpital de la Pitié Salpêtrière, AP-HP, Paris; Biopathologie de la Myéline, Neuroprotection et Stratégies Thérapeutiques (N.C.), INSERM U1119, Fédération de Médecine Translationnelle de Strasbourg (FMTS), Université de Strasbourg; Département de Neurologie (N.C.) and Centre d'Investigation Clinique, INSERM U1434 (N.C.), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Strasbourg; Department of Neurology (B.B.), Hôpital Charles Nicolle, CHU Rouen; Centre de Ressources et Compétences Sclérose en Plaques, Neurologie (M.S.), Université Nice Côte d'Azur, CHU Pasteur 2, Nice; Department of Neurology (S.W., D.L.), CHU Nantes; Service de Neurologie, Sclérose en Plaques, Pathologies de la Myéline et Neuro-inflammation (S.V., R.M.), Hôpital Neurologique Pierre Wertheimer Hospices Civils de Lyon; Centre de Référence des Maladies Inflammatoires Rares du Cerveau et de la Moelle (R.M.), Lyon; and INSERM U1028 (R.M.), CNRS UMR 5292, Center for Research in Neuroscience of Lyon, Lyon1 University, France.
Objective: To compare the efficacy and the risk of severe infectious events of immunosuppressive agents used early as first-line therapy in patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD).
Methods: We retrospectively included patients with NMOSD and a seropositive status for aquaporin 4 or myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies beginning first-line immunosuppressants within 3 years after the disease onset. The main outcome was occurrence of relapse after the initiation of immunosuppressants; the secondary outcome was the annual relapse rate (AAR).
Results: A total of 136 patients were included: 62 (45.6%) were treated with rituximab (RTX), 42 (30.9%) with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and 23 (16.9%) with azathioprine (AZA). Compared with RTX-treated patients, the risk of relapse was higher among MMF-treated patients (hazard ratio [HR], 2.74 [1.17-6.40]; = 0.020) after adjusting for age at disease onset, sex, antibody status, disease duration, ARR before treatment, corticosteroid intake, and relapse location. We did not observe any difference between RTX-treated and AZA-treated patients (HR, 2.13 [0.72-6.28]; = 0.17). No interaction was found between the antibody status and immunosuppressive treatments. ARR was lower with RTX than with MMF ( = 0.039), but no difference was observed with AZA. We observed 9 serious infectious events with MMF, 6 with RTX, and none with AZA.
Conclusions: The use of first-line RTX in NMOSD appears more effective than MMF in suppressing clinical activity, independent of the antibody status.
Classification Of Evidence: That study provides Class III evidence that for patients with NMOSD, first-line RTX is superior to MMF to reduce the risk of relapse.