Tag: ACTRIMS

#MSCOVID19: cladribine is being unfairly tarnished with alemtuzumab’s brush

Barts-MS rose-tinted-odometer: ★★★★★

I think the North American MS community have made some mistakes with their COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, in particular, the NMSS COVID-19 vaccine guidelines for cladribine. In view of the immunology of cladribine’s mode of action and new data that is emerging, I would suggest the NMSS considers updating its guidelines. 

Lemtrada and Mavenclad

If you are about to start Lemtrada or Mavenclad, consider getting the Pfizer BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccine so that the second vaccine injection is done 4 weeks or more prior to starting Lemtrada or Mavenclad. If you are already taking Lemtrada or Mavenclad, consider administering the vaccine injections starting 12 weeks or more after the last Lemtrada or Mavenclad dose, with the optimal timing of the vaccine 24 weeks or more after the last DMT dose2. When possible, resume Lemtrada or Mavenclad 4 weeks or more following the second vaccine injection. This suggested scheduling is not always possible and getting the vaccine when it becomes available to you may be more important than timing the vaccine with your DMT. Work with your MS healthcare provider to determine the best schedule for you.

Lumping cladribine and alemtuzumab together as being immune-depleters of the same ilk is simply wrong. Alemtuzumab is more of a sledgehammer and is relatively non-selective in depleting both T-cells and B-cells and it also hits innate immunity, in particular monocytes. This is why there is a major infection signal (e.g. listeriosis) with alemtuzumab in the 4-6 weeks after each course of treatment. The latter does not occur with the doses of cladribine we use to treat people with MS.

In comparison, the mode of action of cladribine is very subtle and more in keeping with a selective B-cell depleting agent. Cladribine depletes B-cells by about 85-90% and hits mainly memory B-cells, in other words, large numbers of naive B-cell persist in the peripheral blood. We think as memory B-cells are being killed fresh naive B-cells are being released from the bone marrow. This is important because it is the naive B-cell population that is required to make new antibody responses to vaccines. 

Cladribine only depletes T-cells by about 50% a level that in general is not sufficient to put patients at risk of opportunistic infections or even viral infections. When we recently reanalysed all of the cladribine safety data there was no novel or new exogenous (from outside the body) viral infection signal. The only viral infection signal we saw was zoster or shingles, i.e. a reactivation of a latent virus, which is common and occurs with all immunosuppressive therapies. 

Another very big difference between cladribine and alemtuzumab is the fact that cladribine leaves the innate immune system intact, which is important for fighting infections and for processing vaccine antigens and presenting them to the immune system. 

Another factor that is different is the temporal profile of immunodepletion that occurs with alemtuzumab and cladribine. Alemtuzumab causes rapid cell lysis with its effect noticeable in hours to days; in other words, peripheral blood lymphocyte and monocyte counts are depleted to very low levels (nadir) very quickly. In comparison, cladribine works by triggering apoptosis of cells and lymphocytes die slowly over weeks to months reaching a nadir at about 3 to 4 months after each course. Therefore for the NMSS guidance to say “consider administering the vaccine injections starting 12 weeks or more after the last Mavenclad dose, with the optimal timing of the vaccine 24 weeks or more after the last DMT dose” is actually recommending giving the vaccine from the start of the nadir. 

Unlike alemtuzumab, I think the timing of vaccination in patients treated with cladribine is unlikely to make much of a difference because both the afferent (antigen processing and presentation) and efferent (B-cells/antibodies and T-cells) limbs of the immune system is intact, i.e. there is enough hardware or cells at all times post cladribine to make an immune response. Saying this the summary of product characteristics of cladribine clearly states that live vaccines should be avoided until the immune system has reconstituted and the cells counts have returned to normal. Please note this refers to live vaccines and doesn’t apply to the currently licensed COVID-19 vaccines, which are not live attenuated vaccines or LAVs.

The good news is that the above predictions are being borne out by some real-life flu and VZV vaccine data in cladribine-treated patients that have been presented at ACTRIMS this week. My interpretation of this data is that regardless of when a vaccine is administered in patients on cladribine the appear to mount a good antibody response. I agree the number of subjects studied is small and no subject has had grade 4 lymphopaenia (<200/mm3), but these data at least confirm what you would expect to happen based on immunological principles. 

My advice, therefore, remains the same for pwMS on DMTs; during the height of the pandemic having some immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is better than having no immunity. This is why you should get vaccinated ASAP. If you live in an environment where the background risk of COVID-19 is low then you may want to optimise the timing of your vaccine, when you are next dosed with an immunodepleting therapy or when you start or switch therapies.


Roy & Boschert. Analysis of Influenza and Varicella-Zoster Virus Vaccine Antibody Titers in Patients with Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis Treated with Cladribine Tablets. P059 – ACTRIMS 2021

Background: There is a lack of data available to determine the effect of cladribine tablets (CladT) on the antibody response to vaccination in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS).

Objectives: To investigate the immunoprotective response to seasonal influenza and varicella-zoster virus (VZV) vaccination in patients treated with CladT (3.5mg/kg over 2 years) for relapsing MS.

Methods: Blood samples collected during the MAGNIFY-MS study (NCT03364036) from 9 patients with relapsing MS treated with CladT who received seasonal influenza (n=8) or VZV vaccinations (n=1; Shingrix) as a standard of care were retrospectively analyzed. Two control blood samples (baseline sample before starting CladT and closest sample available just before vaccination) and two post-vaccination blood samples (closest sample available after vaccination) were examined. Quantitative antibody titers in response to the seasonal influenza and VZV vaccine were measured by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA), respectively. The seroprotection titer level for the seasonal influenza vaccine is considered ≥40, and was ≥100 IU/L for the VZV vaccine.

Results: Influenza: All patients vaccinated against influenza A and B during year 1 or 2 of CladT treatment retained seroprotection titers of ≥40 in post-vaccination samples across all strains present in the vaccine administered. The number of seropositive patients (HAI ≥40) with a ≥4-fold and ≥2-fold increase against at least 1 strain in post-vaccination titers were 3/8 and 7/8, respectively. VZV: Post-vaccination antibody titers were 40-fold increased over the protective titer at all time points (titers >4748 IU/L).

Conclusions: In this small retrospective investigation, post-vaccination antibody titers in patients treated with CladT for relapsing MS remained at levels that offer protective immunity against seasonal influenza and VZV.

Wu et al.  Evaluating the Impact of Cladribine Tablets on the Development of Antibody Titers: Interim Results from The CLOCK-MS Influenza Vaccine Substudy. P071 ACTRIMS 2021

Background: Cladribine tablets have been approved in more than 80 countries for the treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (RMS), and are hypothesized to function as an immune reconstitution therapy with potential to cross the blood-brain barrier. The CLOCK-MS study (cladribine tablets: collaborative study to evaluate impact on central nervous system biomarkers in multiple sclerosis), is a 24-month, open-label, randomized, multicenter, collaborative Phase IV biomarker research study. The COVID-19 pandemic, and pending vaccine availability, have raised important questions around the impact of MS disease modifying therapies on vaccine efficacy.

Objectives: To evaluate the potential impact of prior treatment with cladribine tablets on the development of antibody titres post-influenza vaccination via a sub-study of CLOCK-MS.

Methods: The CLOCK-MS main study will enroll approximately 50 subjects age 18-65, diagnosed with relapsing-remitting MS or active secondary progressive MS, who had inadequate response to, or were unable to tolerate, an alternate drug indicated for the treatment of RMS. Study participants who have taken at least one dose of cladribine tablets and are planning to obtain one standard-of-care influenza vaccine are eligible to take part in the sub-study if they consent to blood draws. Blood sampling will occur 1) 3 Weeks Pre-Vaccine (within 21 days prior to obtaining a standard of care vaccine), 2) 4 Weeks Post-Vaccine (+/- 7 days), and 3) 6 Months Post-Vaccine (+/- 7 days). Measurements of antibody responses will be performed.

Results: So far 5 patients have been enrolled in this sub-study and had initial titers drawn. All patients fulfilled the per-label requirements for vaccination after cladribine tablets treatment. Initial results at Week 4 post-vaccination will be presented.

Conclusions: The impact of cladribine tablets, a lymphocyte-lowering agent, on the immune system’s ability to develop antibodies in response to a vaccine has not yet been studied. These results are expected to provide preliminary observations around the impact of cladribine tablets on influenza vaccine efficacy in patients with RMS.

CoI: multiple

Twitter: @gavinGiovannoni                                      Medium: @gavin_24211

Katerina Akassoglou

Did you enjoy ACTRIMS?

On Thursday evening I had the privilege of being at the Barancik Prize award ceremony and lecture. Katerina Akassoglou received the award for her work on the blood-brain barrier and fibrin as a pro-inflammatory agent of the innate immune system. Her lecture was a tour de force on what a single individual with dedication and focus can achieve. Well done.

I was particularly impressed that Katerina’s group is now translating this work into the clinic and is developing a class of drugs that recognises and blocks a cryptic or hidden binding site on fibrin. Why is this important? When the blood-brain-barrier gets disrupted and fibrinogen, a clotting protein, leaks into the brain and spinal cord and gets is converted into fibrin. As fibrin this cryptic site is exposed, which stimulates a receptor on microglia, called the integrin receptor Mac-1 (also called alpha(M)beta(2) or CD11b/CD18). This receptor activates microglia and causes them to become ‘hot’ like hot chilly peppers. These chilly peppers burn the tissue around them; the activated or hot microglia produce a large number of damaging molecules including reactive oxygen species, which are not good for the brain and spinal cord and cause loss of axons and neurons.

Importantly, the antibody that Katerina has developed blocks the fribrin-microglia interaction has the potential to treat many diseases inclusing Alzheimer’s disease.

The problem I see with this treatment strategy going forward is how to test in MS. Does it get compared to placebo? Does it get added on to existing DMTs? How do you design proof of biology trials? How do you design dose-finding phase 2 trials? And finally, how do you design a phase 3 trial? Do you need to use this treatment continuously or only during the early stages of inflammation? Is it a treatment that is best targeted to progressive MS?

I suspect more CSF biomarker work looking at activated microglia and macrophages, BBB leakage and fibrin formation needs to be done to provide the tools to test this drug in MS.

Despite these challenges, the award will raise awareness of this pathway and the science underpinning it. I suspect big pharma is already all over this pathway and we may see CNS penetrant small molecule inhibitors emerging. If this work translates into clinical practice there will be many more accolades and awards for Katerina.

Well done and thank you for a very inspirational lecture.

Akassoglou et al. Fibrin-targeting immunotherapy protects against neuroinflammation and neurodegeneration. Nat Immunol. 2018 Nov;19(11):1212-1223.

Activation of innate immunity and deposition of blood-derived fibrin in the central nervous system (CNS) occur in autoimmune and neurodegenerative diseases, including multiple sclerosis (MS) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, the mechanisms that link disruption of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) to neurodegeneration are poorly understood, and exploration of fibrin as a therapeutic target has been limited by its beneficial clotting functions. Here we report the generation of monoclonal antibody 5B8, targeted against the cryptic fibrin epitope γ377-395, to selectively inhibit fibrin-induced inflammation and oxidative stress without interfering with clotting. 5B8 suppressed fibrin-induced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH) oxidase activation and the expression of proinflammatory genes. In animal models of MS and AD, 5B8 entered the CNS and bound to parenchymal fibrin, and its therapeutic administration reduced the activation of innate immunity and neurodegeneration. Thus, fibrin-targeting immunotherapy inhibited autoimmunity- and amyloid-driven neurotoxicity and might have clinical benefit without globally suppressing innate immunity or interfering with coagulation in diverse neurological diseases.

Akassoglou et al. The fibrin-derived gamma377-395 peptide inhibits microglia activation and suppresses relapsing paralysis in central nervous system autoimmune disease. J Exp Med. 2007 Mar 19;204(3):571-82.

Perivascular microglia activation is a hallmark of inflammatory demyelination in multiple sclerosis (MS), but the mechanisms underlying microglia activation and specific strategies to attenuate their activation remain elusive. Here, we identify fibrinogen as a novel regulator of microglia activation and show that targeting of the interaction of fibrinogen with the microglia integrin receptor Mac-1 (alpha(M)beta(2), CD11b/CD18) is sufficient to suppress experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis in mice that retain full coagulation function. We show that fibrinogen, which is deposited perivascularly in MS plaques, signals through Mac-1 and induces the differentiation of microglia to phagocytes via activation of Akt and Rho. Genetic disruption of fibrinogen-Mac-1 interaction in fibrinogen-gamma(390-396A) knock-in mice or pharmacologically impeding fibrinogen-Mac-1 interaction through intranasal delivery of a fibrinogen-derived inhibitory peptide (gamma(377-395)) attenuates microglia activation and suppresses relapsing paralysis. Because blocking fibrinogen-Mac-1 interactions affects the proinflammatory but not the procoagulant properties of fibrinogen, targeting the gamma(377-395) fibrinogen epitope could represent a potential therapeutic strategy for MS and other neuroinflammatory diseases associated with blood-brain barrier disruption and microglia activation.