Skip to main content
Advertisement
  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
    • Education
  • Online Sections
    • COVID-19
    • Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Anti-racism, & Social Justice (IDEAS)
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
    • Practice Buzz
  • Collections
    • Topics A-Z
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Center

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
    • Education
  • Online Sections
    • COVID-19
    • Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Anti-racism, & Social Justice (IDEAS)
    • Innovations in Care Delivery
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
    • Practice Buzz
  • Collections
    • Topics A-Z
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Translations
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Center
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Issues
  • COVID-19 Article Hub

User menu

  • My Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Neurology Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
Home
A peer-reviewed clinical and translational neurology open access journal
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
Site Logo
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Issues
  • COVID-19 Article Hub

Share

April 2015; 2 (2) EditorialOpen Access

Is intrathecal anti-CD20 an option to target compartmentalized CNS inflammation in progressive MS?

Martin S. Weber
First published March 12, 2015, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.0000000000000084
Martin S. Weber
From the Institute of Neuropathology and Department of Neurology, University Medical Centre, Göttingen, Germany.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Full PDF
Citation
Is intrathecal anti-CD20 an option to target compartmentalized CNS inflammation in progressive MS?
Martin S. Weber
Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm Apr 2015, 2 (2) e84; DOI: 10.1212/NXI.0000000000000084

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Permissions

Make Comment

See Comments

Downloads
523

Share

  • Article
  • Info & Disclosures
Loading

B cells have gained enormous attention in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). While our earlier pathogenic understanding of its cause primarily focused on B cell–derived plasma cells producing self-reactive antibodies, more recent findings support the theory that B cells themselves substantially contribute to MS pathogenesis. This conceptual change was primarily triggered by the empirical observation that anti-CD20–mediated B-cell depletion is effective in the treatment of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). Clearly exceeding the initial expectations, IV rituximab led to a rapid and lasting halt in the formation of new CNS lesions in patients with RRMS.1 Its further humanized successor ocrelizumab,2 as well as the human anti-CD20 antibody ofatumumab,3 confirmed these encouraging findings. The clinical efficacy of anti-CD20 provided greater appreciation of the fact that antigen-specific B cells are important antigen-presenting cells (APCs),4,5 most likely due to their unique capability to directly bind larger conformational antigens at very low concentrations via their B-cell receptor. Furthermore, B cells could be identified as a major source of proinflammatory cytokines,6 activating other APCs and fostering development of encephalitogenic T cells, jointly consolidating the concept that in RRMS, B cells exert distinctive pathogenic properties that can be targeted by systemic anti-CD20 treatment.

Emerging evidence suggests that throughout the chronic course of MS, pathogenic B-cell function gradually shifts from the periphery into the inflamed CNS. This notion is supported by the observation of B-cell follicle-like lymphatic tissue in the meninges of a proportion of patients with secondary progressive MS.7 Development of such ectopic structures is generally believed to indicate reproduction and differentiation of pathogenic lymphocytes within the target organ itself; this may partially explain why in later stages of MS clinical progression decreasingly correlates with MRI-detectable CNS infiltration while histopathology remains inflammatory.8 In this setting of compartmentalized CNS inflammation, systemically applied MS agents, in particular molecularly large monoclonal antibodies, may lose their effectiveness. Supporting this notion, only 0.1% of systemically infused anti-CD20 can be found within the CSF,9 raising the concern that parenchymal B cells as well as meningeal B cells and/or B-cell follicles cannot be reached and depleted by systemic anti-CD20. Accordingly, one strategy currently being explored to eradicate CNS-established B cells more efficiently is intrathecal (IT) administration of anti-CD20 in patients with progressive MS.

In this issue of Neurology® Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation, Svenningsson et al.10 report their 1-year findings from a phase 1b study in which they tested IT injection of rituximab in 10 patients with progressive MS. Rituximab was provided via an Ommaya reservoir connected to a ventricular catheter. In the first 3 patients the dose was titrated, with daily applications of 1 mg, 2.5 mg, 5 mg, 10 mg, and finally 25 mg rituximab; lymphocyte subpopulations were monitored daily during this dose escalation period. All 10 patients thereafter received 3 weekly IT injections of 25 mg rituximab, and peripheral as well as CSF lymphocyte subpopulations were assessed every 2–3 months. As a first finding, the authors report a substantial decline of peripheral B cells, even after the initial application of 1 mg IT rituximab. Following the second dose of 2.5 mg, B lymphocytes became undetectable in the blood, and the full dose of 3 × 25 mg/week resulted in complete depletion of peripheral lymphocytes lasting for 2–3 months. In 2 patients with elevated baseline CSF lymphocyte counts, B-cell frequency rapidly declined upon IT administration of rituximab, whereas in all other patients possible changes remained undetectable due to very low initial CSF lymphocyte counts.

Although the primary outcome of this study, the safety and tolerability of IT anti-CD20 in progressive MS, will be reported upon study completion, we can draw a few important conclusions from these 1-year data. First, up to this point, IT application of rituximab seems to be well-tolerated. Second, the doses used systemically to date are likely substantially higher than required for rituximab's immunologic effect. This notion is in line with ongoing clinical trials evaluating markedly lower doses of anti-CD20 systemically. Third, using this route of administration, the CNS cannot be targeted selectively, which could have been desirable to deplete pathogenic B cells while avoiding the systemic side effects of pan–B cell depletion. This key observation likely refers to the earlier finding that injected IT anti-CD20 has a very short half-life in the CSF and accumulates within the serum.9 Probably the most important and related limitation of this study is that it remains uncertain whether IT administration is truly capable of depleting B cells within the CNS or whether the drop in CSF B-cell counts is a consequence of a systemic effect. In an attempt to address this question, a recent experimental study compared IT anti-CD20 to its systemic application and observed that IT administration of anti-CD20 was indeed superior in depleting meningeal B cells in established CNS autoimmune disease.11 In conclusion and in this context, the study conducted by Svenningsson et al. is an important contribution to pioneering the use of IT anti-CD20 in the treatment of progressive MS, fueling hopes that a facilitated elimination of CNS B cells may translate into clinical benefit.

STUDY FUNDING

No targeted funding reported.

DISCLOSURE

M.S. Weber is serving as an editor for PLoS One; received travel funding and/or speaker honoraria from Biogen-Idec, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, and Bayer; and receives research support from the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Novartis, TEVA, Biogen-Idec, Roche, and the ProFutura Programme of the Universitätsmedizin Göttingen. Go to Neurology.org/nn for full disclosure forms.

Footnotes

  • Funding information and disclosures are provided at the end of the article. Go to Neurology.org/nn for full disclosure forms. The Article Processing Charge for this editorial was waived at the discretion of the Editor.

  • See article

  • © 2015 American Academy of Neurology

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial No Derivative 3.0 License, which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Hauser SL,
    2. Waubant E,
    3. Arnold DL,
    4. et al
    ; HERMES Trial Group. B-cell depletion with rituximab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2008;358:676–688.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Kappos L,
    2. Li D,
    3. Calabresi PA,
    4. et al
    . Ocrelizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a phase 2, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet 2011;378:1779–1787.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Sorensen PS,
    2. Lisby S,
    3. Grove R,
    4. et al
    . Safety and efficacy of ofatumumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a phase 2 study. Neurology 2014;82:573–581.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    1. Weber MS,
    2. Prod'homme T,
    3. Patarroyo JC,
    4. et al
    . B-cell activation influences T-cell polarization and outcome of anti-CD20 B-cell depletion in central nervous system autoimmunity. Ann Neurol 2010;68:369–383.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Molnarfi N,
    2. Schulze-Topphoff U,
    3. Weber MS,
    4. et al
    . MHC class II-dependent B cell APC function is required for induction of CNS autoimmunity independent of myelin-specific antibodies. J Exp Med 2013;210:2921–2937.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Bar-Or A,
    2. Fawaz L,
    3. Fan B,
    4. et al
    . Abnormal B-cell cytokine responses a trigger of T-cell-mediated disease in MS? Ann Neurol 2010;67:452–461.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Magliozzi R,
    2. Howell O,
    3. Vora A,
    4. et al
    . Meningeal B-cell follicles in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis associate with early onset of disease and severe cortical pathology. Brain 2007;130:1089–1104.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Lassmann H
    . New concepts on progressive multiple sclerosis. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2007;7:239–244.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Rubenstein JL,
    2. Fridlyand J,
    3. Abrey L,
    4. et al
    . Phase I study of intraventricular administration of rituximab in patients with recurrent CNS and intraocular lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:1350–1356.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Svenningsson A,
    2. Bergman J,
    3. Dring A,
    4. et al
    . Rapid depletion of B lymphocytes by ultra-low-dose rituximab delivered intrathecally. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2015;2:e79; doi: 10.1212/NXI.0000000000000079.
    OpenUrl
  11. 11.↵
    1. Lehmann-Horn K,
    2. Kinzel S,
    3. Feldmann L,
    4. et al
    . Intrathecal anti-CD20 efficiently depletes meningeal B cells in CNS autoimmunity. Ann Clini Transl Neurol 2014;1:490–496.
    OpenUrl

Letters: Rapid online correspondence

No comments have been published for this article.
Comment

REQUIREMENTS

If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org

Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.

If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.

Submission specifications:

  • Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
  • Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
  • Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
  • Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
  • Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.

More guidelines and information on Disputes & Debates

Compose Comment

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
NOTE: The first author must also be the corresponding author of the comment.
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Publishing Agreement
NOTE: All authors, besides the first/corresponding author, must complete a separate Publishing Agreement Form and provide via email to the editorial office before comments can be posted.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

You May Also be Interested in

Back to top
  • Article
    • STUDY FUNDING
    • DISCLOSURE
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Disclosures

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.

Topics Discussed

  • Multiple sclerosis
  • Autoimmune diseases
  • Class IV
  • Clinical trials Observational study (Cohort, Case control)

Alert Me

  • Alert me when eletters are published
Advertisement
Neurology - Neuroimmunology Neuroinflammation: 9 (4)

Articles

  • Articles
  • Issues
  • Popular Articles

About

  • About the Journals
  • Ethics Policies
  • Editors & Editorial Board
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

Submit

  • Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Information for Reviewers
  • AAN Guidelines
  • Permissions

Subscribers

  • Subscribe
  • Sign up for eAlerts
  • RSS Feed
Site Logo
  • Visit neurology Template on Facebook
  • Follow neurology Template on Twitter
  • Visit Neurology on YouTube
  • Neurology
  • Neurology: Clinical Practice
  • Neurology: Genetics
  • Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Neurology: Education
  • AAN.com
  • AANnews
  • Continuum
  • Brain & Life
  • Neurology Today

Wolters Kluwer Logo

Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
Online ISSN: 2332-7812

© 2022 American Academy of Neurology

  • Privacy Policy
  • Feedback
  • Advertise