Amiloride, fluoxetine or riluzole to reduce brain volume loss in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: the MS-SMART four-arm RCT

Background: Neuroprotective drugs are needed to slow or prevent neurodegeneration and disability accrual in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Amiloride, fluoxetine and riluzole are repurposed drugs with potential neuroprotective effects. Objectives: To assess whether or not amiloride, fluoxetine and riluzole can reduce the rate of brain volume loss in people with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis over 96 weeks. The secondary objectives that were assessed were feasibility of a multiarm trial design approach, evaluation of anti-inflammatory effects, clinician- and patient-reported efficacy and three mechanistic substudies. Design: A multicentre, multiarm, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group Phase IIb trial with follow-up at 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 weeks. Patients, investigators (including magnetic resonance imaging analysts), and treating and independent assessing neurologists were blinded to the treatment allocation. The target sample size was 440 patients. Setting: Thirteen UK clinical neuroscience centres. Participants: Participants were aged 25–65 years, had secondary progressive multiple sclerosis with evidence of disease progression independent of relapses in the previous 2 years, and had an Expanded Disability Status Scale score of 4.0–6.5. Patients were ineligible if they could not have a magnetic resonance imaging scan; had a relapse or steroids in the previous 3 months; or had epilepsy, depression, bipolar disorder, glaucoma, bleeding disorders or significant organ comorbidities. Exclusion criteria were concurrent disease-modified treatments, immunosuppressants or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Interventions: Participants received amiloride (5 mg), fluoxetine (20 mg), riluzole (50 mg) or placebo (randomised 1 : 1 : 1 : 1) twice daily. Main outcome measures: The primary end point was magnetic resonance imaging-derived percentage brain volume change at 96 weeks. Secondary end points were new/enlarging T2 lesions, pseudoatrophy, and clinician- and patient-reported measures (including the Expanded Disability Status Scale, Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite, Symbol Digit Modalities Test, low-contrast letter visual acuity, Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale 29 items, version 2, Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale, version 2, and questionnaires addressing pain and fatigue). The exploratory end points included measures of persistent new T1 hypointensities and grey matter volume changes. The substudies were advanced magnetic resonance imaging, optical coherence tomography and cerebrospinal fluid analyses. Results: Between December 2014 and June 2016, 445 patients were randomised (analysed) to amiloride [n = 111 (99)], fluoxetine [n = 111 (96)], riluzole [n = 111 (99)] or placebo [n = 112 (99)]. A total of 206 randomised patients consented to the advanced magnetic resonance imaging substudy, 260 consented to the optical coherence tomography substudy and 70 consented to the cerebrospinal fluid substudy. No significant difference was seen between the active drugs and placebo in percentage brain volume change at week 96 as follows (where negative values mean more atrophy than placebo): amiloride minus placebo 0.0% (Dunnett-adjusted 95% confidence interval –0.4% to 0.5%), fluoxetine minus placebo –0.1% (Dunnett-adjusted 95% confidence interval –0.5% to 0.3%); riluzole minus placebo –0.1% (Dunnett-adjusted 95% confidence interval –0.6% to 0.3%). There was good adherence to study drugs. The proportion of patients experiencing adverse events was similar in the treatment and placebo groups. There were no emergent safety issues. Limitations: There was a lower than expected uptake in the cerebrospinal fluid substudy. Conclusions: A multiarm Phase II paradigm is efficient in determining which neuroprotective agents to take through to Phase III trials. Amiloride, fluoxetine and riluzole were not effective in reducing the brain atrophy rate in people with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Mechanistic pathobiological insight was gained. Future work: To use the information gained from the Multiple Sclerosis-Secondary Progressive Multi-Arm Randomisation Trial (MS-SMART) to inform future trial design as new candidate agents are identified. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN28440672, NCT01910259 and EudraCT 2012-005394-31. Funding: This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) partnership. This will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 7, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This trial also received funding from the UK MS Society and the US National Multiple Sclerosis Society

Efficacy of three neuroprotective drugs in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (MS-SMART):a phase 2b, multiarm, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial

Neurodegeneration is the pathological substrate that causes major disability in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. A synthesis of preclinical and clinical research identified three neuroprotective drugs acting on different axonal pathobiologies. We aimed to test the efficacy of these drugs in an efficient manner with respect to time, cost, and patient resource. Methods: We did a phase 2b, multiarm, parallel group, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial at 13 clinical neuroscience centres in the UK. We recruited patients (aged 25-65 years) with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis who were not on disease-modifying treatment and who had an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 4·0-6·5. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) at baseline, by a research nurse using a centralised web-based service, to receive twice-daily oral treatment of either amiloride 5 mg, fluoxetine 20 mg, riluzole 50 mg, or placebo for 96 weeks. The randomisation procedure included minimisation based on sex, age, EDSS score at randomisation, and trial site. Capsules were identical in appearance to achieve masking. Patients, investigators, and MRI readers were unaware of treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was volumetric MRI percentage brain volume change (PBVC) from baseline to 96 weeks, analysed using multiple regression, adjusting for baseline normalised brain volume and minimisation criteria. The primary analysis was a complete-case analysis based on the intention-to-treat population (all patients with data at week 96). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01910259

Multiple Sclerosis-Secondary Progressive Multi-Arm Randomisation Trial (MS-SMART): a multiarm phase IIb randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial comparing the efficacy of three neuroprotective drugs in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis

Introduction: The major unmet need in multiple sclerosis (MS) is for neuroprotective therapies that can slow (or ideally stop) the rate of disease progression. The UK MS Society Clinical Trials Network (CTN) was initiated in 2007 with the purpose of developing a national, efficient, multiarm trial of repurposed drugs. Key underpinning work was commissioned by the CTN to inform the design, outcome selection and drug choice including animal models and a systematic review. This identified seven leading oral agents for repurposing as neuroprotective therapies in secondary progressive MS (SPMS). The purpose of the Multiple Sclerosis-Secondary Progressive Multi-Arm Randomisation Trial (MS-SMART) will be to evaluate the neuroprotective efficacy of three of these drugs, selected with distinct mechanistic actions and previous evidence of likely efficacy, against a common placebo arm. The interventions chosen were: amiloride (acid-sensing ion channel antagonist); fluoxetine (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) and riluzole (glutamate antagonist). Methods and analysis: Patients with progressing SPMS will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to amiloride, fluoxetine, riluzole or matched placebo and followed for 96 weeks. The primary outcome will be the percentage brain volume change (PBVC) between baseline and 96 weeks, derived from structural MR brain imaging data using the Structural Image Evaluation, using Normalisation, of Atrophy method. With a sample size of 90 per arm, this will give 90% power to detect a 40% reduction in PBVC in any active arm compared with placebo and 80% power to detect a 35% reduction (analysing by analysis of covariance and with adjustment for multiple comparisons of three 1.67% two-sided tests), giving a 5% overall two-sided significance level. MS-SMART is not powered to detect differences between the three active treatment arms. Allowing for a 20% dropout rate, 110 patients per arm will be randomised. The study will take place at Neuroscience centres in England and Scotland

The influence of ethanol blends on particulate matter emissions from gasoline direct injection engines

Particulate Matter (PM) legislation for gasoline engines and the introduction of gasoline/ethanol blends, make it important to know the effect of fuel composition on PM emissions. Tests have been conducted with fuels of known composition in both a single cylinder engine and V8 engine with a three-way catalyst. The V8 engine used an unleaded gasoline (PURA) with known composition and distillation characteristics as a base fuel and with 10% by volume ethanol. The single cylinder engine used a 65% iso-octane - 35% toluene mixture as its base fuel. The engines had essentially the same combustion system, with a centrally mounted 6-hole spray-guided direct injection system. Particle size distributions were recorded and these have also been converted to mass distributions. Filter samples were taken for thermo-gravimetric analysis (TGA) to give composition information. Both engines were operated at 1500 rpm under part load. The tests with the single cylinder engine used lambda of 0.9, 1.0 and 1.1 with an ignition timing sweep of 15-45°bTDC. The trends with the stoichiometric and weak mixtures were less clear (the PM emissions being at low levels), but with lambda of 0.9 the trends were clear. For the rich mixture, advancing the ignition timing increased both PM number and mass emissions, and the use of E10 reduced the number emissions by a factor of 25-65 and the mass emissions by a factor of 2-10. The V8 tests were at stoichiometric with injection timing sweeps during induction (120 to 360°bTDC), with a reduction in both PM number and mass due to reactions in the catalyst. The earlier injection gave lower PM emissions and this was attributed to there being more time for mixture preparation, leading to a more homogeneous mixture. The addition of 10% ethanol led to an increase in PM emissions (both in terms of mass and number). Copyright © 2010 SAE International

Efficacy of three neuroprotective drugs in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (MS-SMART): a phase 2b, multiarm, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial

Background Neurodegeneration is the pathological substrate that causes major disability in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. A synthesis of preclinical and clinical research identified three neuroprotective drugs acting on different axonal pathobiologies. We aimed to test the efficacy of these drugs in an efficient manner with respect to time, cost, and patient resource. Methods We did a phase 2b, multiarm, parallel group, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial at 13 clinical neuroscience centres in the UK. We recruited patients (aged 25–65 years) with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis who were not on disease-modifying treatment and who had an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 4·0–6·5. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) at baseline, by a research nurse using a centralised web-based service, to receive twice-daily oral treatment of either amiloride 5 mg, fluoxetine 20 mg, riluzole 50 mg, or placebo for 96 weeks. The randomisation procedure included minimisation based on sex, age, EDSS score at randomisation, and trial site. Capsules were identical in appearance to achieve masking. Patients, investigators, and MRI readers were unaware of treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was volumetric MRI percentage brain volume change (PBVC) from baseline to 96 weeks, analysed using multiple regression, adjusting for baseline normalised brain volume and minimisation criteria. The primary analysis was a complete-case analysis based on the intention-to-treat population (all patients with data at week 96). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01910259. Findings Between Jan 29, 2015, and June 22, 2016, 445 patients were randomly allocated amiloride (n=111), fluoxetine (n=111), riluzole (n=111), or placebo (n=112). The primary analysis included 393 patients who were allocated amiloride (n=99), fluoxetine (n=96), riluzole (n=99), and placebo (n=99). No difference was noted between any active treatment and placebo in PBVC (amiloride vs placebo, 0·0% [95% CI −0·4 to 0·5; p=0·99]; fluoxetine vs placebo −0·1% [–0·5 to 0·3; p=0·86]; riluzole vs placebo −0·1% [–0·6 to 0·3; p=0·77]). No emergent safety issues were reported. The incidence of serious adverse events was low and similar across study groups (ten [9%] patients in the amiloride group, seven [6%] in the fluoxetine group, 12 [11%] in the riluzole group, and 13 [12%] in the placebo group). The most common serious adverse events were infections and infestations. Three patients died during the study, from causes judged unrelated to active treatment; one patient assigned amiloride died from metastatic lung cancer, one patient assigned riluzole died from ischaemic heart disease and coronary artery thrombosis, and one patient assigned fluoxetine had a sudden death (primary cause) with multiple sclerosis and obesity listed as secondary causes. Interpretation The absence of evidence for neuroprotection in this adequately powered trial indicates that exclusively targeting these aspects of axonal pathobiology in patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis is insufficient to mitigate neuroaxonal loss. These findings argue for investigation of different mechanistic targets and future consideration of combination treatment trials. This trial provides a template for future simultaneous testing of multiple disease-modifying medicines in neurological medicine. Funding Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) Programme, an MRC and NIHR partnership, UK Multiple Sclerosis Society, and US National Multiple Sclerosis Society

Multiple Sclerosis-Secondary Progressive Multi-Arm Randomisation Trial (MS-SMART): A multiarm phase IIb randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial comparing the efficacy of three neuroprotective drugs in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis

Introduction The major unmet need in multiple sclerosis (MS) is for neuroprotective therapies that can slow (or ideally stop) the rate of disease progression. The UK MS Society Clinical Trials Network (CTN) was initiated in 2007 with the purpose of developing a national, efficient, multiarm trial of repurposed drugs. Key underpinning work was commissioned by the CTN to inform the design, outcome selection and drug choice including animal models and a systematic review. This identified seven leading oral agents for repurposing as neuroprotective therapies in secondary progressive MS (SPMS). The purpose of the Multiple Sclerosis-Secondary Progressive Multi-Arm Randomisation Trial (MS-SMART) will be to evaluate the neuroprotective efficacy of three of these drugs, selected with distinct mechanistic actions and previous evidence of likely efficacy, against a common placebo arm. The interventions chosen were: amiloride (acid-sensing ion channel antagonist); fluoxetine (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) and riluzole (glutamate antagonist). Methods and analysis Patients with progressing SPMS will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to amiloride, fluoxetine, riluzole or matched placebo and followed for 96 weeks. The primary outcome will be the percentage brain volume change (PBVC) between baseline and 96 weeks, derived from structural MR brain imaging data using the Structural Image Evaluation, using Normalisation, of Atrophy method. With a sample size of 90 per arm, this will give 90% power to detect a 40% reduction in PBVC in any active arm compared with placebo and 80% power to detect a 35% reduction (analysing by analysis of covariance and with adjustment for multiple comparisons of three 1.67% two-sided tests), giving a 5% overall two-sided significance level. MS-SMART is not powered to detect differences between the three active treatment arms. Allowing for a 20% dropout rate, 110 patients per arm will be randomised. The study will take place at Neuroscience centres in England and Scotland. Ethics and dissemination MS-SMART was approved by the Scotland A Research Ethics Committee on 13 January 2013 (REC reference: 13/SS/0007). Results of the study will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Trial registration numbers NCT01910259; 2012-005394-31; ISRCTN28440672

Cognitive rehabilitation and aerobic exercise for cognitive impairment in people with progressive multiple sclerosis (CogEx): a randomised, blinded, sham-controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Cognitive dysfunction in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis can improve with cognitive rehabilitation or exercise. Similar effects have not been clearly shown in people with progressive multiple sclerosis. We aimed to investigate the individual and synergistic effects of cognitive rehabilitation and exercise in patients with progressive multiple sclerosis. METHODS: CogEx was a randomised, sham-controlled trial completed in 11 hospital clinics, universities, and rehabilitation centres in Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Italy, UK, and USA. Patients with progressive multiple sclerosis were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 25-65 years and had an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of less than 7. All had impaired processing speed defined as a performance of 1·282 SD or greater below normative data on the Symbol Digit modalities Tests (SDMT). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1), using an interactive web-response system accessed online from each centre, to cognitive rehabilitation plus exercise, cognitive rehabilitation plus sham exercise, exercise plus sham cognitive rehabilitation, or sham exercise plus sham cognitive rehabilitation. The study statistician created the randomisation sequence that was stratified by centre. Participants, outcome assessors, and investigators were blinded to group allocation. The study statistician was masked to treatment during analysis only. Interventions were conducted two times per week for 12 weeks: cognitive rehabilitation used an individualised, computer-based, incremental approach to improve processing speed; sham cognitive rehabilitation consisted of internet training provided individually; the exercise intervention involved individualised aerobic training using a recumbent arm-leg stepper; and the sham exercise involved stretching and balance tasks without inducing cardiovascular strain. The primary outcome measure was processing speed measured by SDMT at 12 weeks; least squares mean differences were compared between groups using linear mixed model in all participants who had a 12-week assessment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03679468, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Dec 14, 2018, and April 2, 2022, 311 people with progressive multiple sclerosis were enrolled and 284 (91%) completed the 12-week assessment (117/311 [38%] male and 194/311 [62%] female). The least squares mean group differences in SDMT at 12 weeks did not differ between groups (p=0·85). Compared with the sham cognitive rehabilitation and sham exercise group (n=67), differences were -1·30 (95% CI -3·75 to 1·16) for the cognitive rehabilitation plus exercise group (n=70); -2·78 (-5·23 to -0·33) for the sham cognitive rehabilitation plus exercise group (n=71); and -0·71 (-3·11 to 1·70) for the cognitive rehabilitation plus sham exercise group (n=76). 11 adverse events possibly related to the interventions occurred, six in the exercise plus sham cognitive rehabilitation group (pain, dizziness, and falls), two in the cognitive rehabilitation plus sham exercise group (headache and pain), two in the cognitive rehabilitation and exercise group (increased fatigue and pain), and one in the dual sham group (fall). INTERPRETATION: Combined cognitive rehabilitation plus exercise does not seem to improve processing speed in people with progressive multiple sclerosis. However, our sham interventions were not inactive. Studies comparing interventions with a non-intervention group are needed to investigate whether clinically meaningful improvements in processing speed might be attainable in people with progressive multiple sclerosis. FUNDING: MS Canada