Our review should provide some guidance to clinicians and patients. On the basis of high quality evidence, natalizumab and IFNß-1a (Rebif) are superior to all other treatments for preventing clinical relapses in RRMS in the short-term (24 months) compared to placebo. Moderate quality evidence supports a protective effect of natalizumab and IFNß-1a (Rebif) against disability progression in RRMS in the short-term compared to placebo. These treatments are associated with long-term serious adverse events and their benefit-risk balance might be unfavourable. IFNß-1b (Betaseron) and mitoxantrone probably decreased the odds of the participants with RRMS having relapses, compared with placebo (moderate quality of evidence). The benefit-risk balance with azathioprine is uncertain, however this agent might be effective in decreasing the odds of the participants with RRMS having relapses and disability progression over 24 to 36 months, compared with placebo. The lack of convincing efficacy data shows that IFNß-1a (Avonex), intravenous immunoglobulins, cyclophosphamide and long-term steroids have an unfavourable benefit-risk balance in RRMS. None of the included treatments are effective in decreasing disability progression in patients with progressive MS. It is important to consider that the clinical effects of all these treatments beyond two years are uncertain, a relevant point for a disease of 30 to 40 years duration. Direct head-to-head comparison(s) between natalizumab and IFNß-1a (Rebif) or between azathioprine and IFNß-1a (Rebif) should be top priority on the research agenda and follow-up of the trial cohorts should be mandatory.
Intravenous immunoglobulin in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a dose-finding trial.
Several studies have reported a reduction of relapses after the long-term administration of IV immunoglobulin (IVIG) to patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), but they were mostly small and differed in terms of predefined outcome variables and treatment regimen. We therefore set out to test two different doses of a new formulation of immunoglobulin termed IGIV-C 10% for suppression of both clinical and MRI disease activity as well as safety.
                One hundred twenty-seven patients with RRMS participated in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Forty-four and 42 patients received treatment with 0.2 and 0.4 g/kg of IGIV-C 10%, and 41 patients received an equal volume of placebo (0.1% albumin) every 4 weeks for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of relapse-free patients. The main secondary endpoint was lesion activity assessed by 6-weekly MRI.
                Baseline variables were similar in IVIG- and placebo-treated groups. After 1 year, the proportion of relapse-free patients did not differ statistically according to treatment (IVIG 0.2 g/kg: 57%; IVIG 0.4 g/kg: 60%; placebo: 68%), and there was no difference regarding the cumulative number of unique newly active MRI lesions (median numbers: IVIG 0.2 g/kg: 8.0; IVIG 0.4 g/kg: 5.0; placebo: 7.2) after 48 weeks. There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of adverse events.
                Although IV immunoglobulin (IVIG) treatment was well tolerated, this study did not substantiate a beneficial effect of IVIG in doses ranging from 0.2 to 0.4 g/kg. This result seriously questions the utility of IVIG for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.