<i>In Vitro</i>Assessment of the Biologic Activity of Interferon Beta Formulations used for the Treatment of Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis

Scagnolari, Carolina; Selvaggi, Carla; Biase, E. Di; Fraulo, Maurizio; Dangond, Fernando; Antonelli, Guido

doi:10.1080/15321819.2013.848815

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…pegylated interferon beta-1a or E. coli derived interferon beta-1b preparations, where the highest tolerated daily dose - if given as continuous 24-hour IV infusion for 3–5 days - has not yet been determined. A detailed discussion of the comparability of the different interferon beta preparations as well as of the determination of their biological and specific activities is given elsewhere 22 77 78 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interferons in the Therapy of Severe Coronavirus Infections: A Critical Analysis and Recollection of a Forgotten Therapeutic Regimen with Interferon Beta

Brzoska¹,

Eick²,

Hündgen

2020

Drug Res (Stuttg)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractThe pharmacological and immunological properties of interferons, especially those of interferon beta, and the corresponding treatment strategies are described, and the results of studies with different interferons in coronavirus infections are analysed. Furthermore, the data obtained with high-dosed native interferon beta in life-threatening acute viral diseases as well as the results of clinical pilot studies with high-dosed recombinant interferon beta-1a are provided because they serve as the rationale for the proposed therapeutic regimen to be applied in acute viral infections. This regimen differs from those approved for treatment of multiple sclerosis and consists of interferon beta-1a administered as a 24 hour intravenous infusion at a daily dose of up to 90 µg for 3–5 consecutive days. Since under this regimen transient severe side effects can occur, it is analysed which patients are suitable for this kind of treatment in general and if patients with severe coronavirus infections could also be treated accordingly.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interferons in the Therapy of Severe Coronavirus Infections: A Critical Analysis and Recollection of a Forgotten Therapeutic Regimen with Interferon Beta

Brzoska¹,

Eick²,

Hündgen

2020

Drug Res (Stuttg)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…143 Several in vitro studies have concluded that the biological activity of some IFN-β-1a formulations is greater than that of IFN-β-1b, 18,143,144 but the clinical implications of such differences are unknown. Furthermore, these studies have not compared all of the approved formulations of recombinant IFN-β.…”

Section: Beta-interferonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of beta-interferon and glatiramer acetate for treating multiple sclerosis: systematic review and economic evaluation

Melendez‐Torres

Auguste

Armoiry

et al. 2017

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background At the time of publication of the most recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance [technology appraisal (TA) 32] in 2002 on beta-interferon (IFN-β) and glatiramer acetate (GA) for multiple sclerosis, there was insufficient evidence of their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Objectives To undertake (1) systematic reviews of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IFN-β and GA in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) and clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) compared with best supportive care (BSC) and each other, investigating annualised relapse rate (ARR) and time to disability progression confirmed at 3 months and 6 months and (2) cost-effectiveness assessments of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for CIS and RRMS compared with BSC and each other. Review methods Searches were undertaken in January and February 2016 in databases including The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and the Science Citation Index. We limited some database searches to specific start dates based on previous, relevant systematic reviews. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts with recourse to a third when needed. The Cochrane tool and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and Philips checklists were used for appraisal. Narrative synthesis and, when possible, random-effects meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed. Cost-effectiveness analysis used published literature, findings from the Department of Health’s risk-sharing scheme (RSS) and expert opinion. A de novo economic model was built for CIS. The base case used updated RSS data, a NHS and Personal Social Services perspective, a 50-year time horizon, 2014/15 prices and a discount rate of 3.5%. Outcomes are reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We undertook probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results In total, 6420 publications were identified, of which 63 relating to 35 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. In total, 86% had a high risk of bias. There was very little difference between drugs in reducing moderate or severe relapse rates in RRMS. All were beneficial compared with BSC, giving a pooled rate ratio of 0.65 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.76] for ARR and a hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.87) for time to disability progression confirmed at 3 months. NMA suggested that 20 mg of GA given subcutaneously had the highest probability of being the best at reducing ARR. Three separate cost-effectiveness searches identified > 2500 publications, with 26 included studies informing the narrative synthesis and model inputs. In the base case using a modified RSS the mean incremental cost was £31,900 for pooled DMTs compared with BSC and the mean incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were 0.943, giving an ICER of £33,800 per QALY gained for people with RRMS. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis the ICER was £34,000 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analysis, using the assessment group inputs gave an ICER of £12,800 per QALY gained for pooled DMTs compared with BSC. Pegylated IFN-β-1 (125 µg) was the most cost-effective option of the individual DMTs compared with BSC (ICER £7000 per QALY gained); GA (20 mg) was the most cost-effective treatment for CIS (ICER £16,500 per QALY gained). Limitations Although we built a de novo model for CIS that incorporated evidence from our systematic review of clinical effectiveness, our findings relied on a population diagnosed with CIS before implementation of the revised 2010 McDonald criteria. Conclusions DMTs were clinically effective for RRMS and CIS but cost-effective only for CIS. Both RCT evidence and RSS data are at high risk of bias. Research priorities include comparative studies with longer follow-up and systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016043278. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

show abstract

Antitumor activity of interferon-β1a in hormone refractory prostate cancer with neuroendocrine differentiation

Dicitore

Grassi

Borghi

et al. 2017

J Endocrinol Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

In VitroAssessment of the Biologic Activity of Interferon Beta Formulations used for the Treatment of Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis

Cited by 7 publications

References 32 publications

Interferons in the Therapy of Severe Coronavirus Infections: A Critical Analysis and Recollection of a Forgotten Therapeutic Regimen with Interferon Beta

Interferons in the Therapy of Severe Coronavirus Infections: A Critical Analysis and Recollection of a Forgotten Therapeutic Regimen with Interferon Beta

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of beta-interferon and glatiramer acetate for treating multiple sclerosis: systematic review and economic evaluation

Antitumor activity of interferon-β1a in hormone refractory prostate cancer with neuroendocrine differentiation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About