You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Multiple sclerosis
Original research
Two-year regional grey and white matter volume changes with natalizumab and fingolimod
  1. Paolo Preziosa1,2,
  2. Maria A Rocca1,2,
  3. Elisabetta Pagani1,
  4. Loredana Storelli1,
  5. Mariaemma Rodegher2,
  6. Lucia Moiola2,
  7. Massimo Filippi1,2,3,4
  1. 1 Neuroimaging Research Unit, Institute of Experimental Neurology, Division of Neuroscience, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
  2. 2 Neurology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
  3. 3 Neurophysiology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
  4. 4 Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
  1. Correspondence to Prof. Massimo Filippi, Neuroimaging Research Unit, Institute of Experimental Neurology, Division of Neuroscience, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan 20132, Italy; filippi.massimo{at}hsr.it

Abstract

Objective To compare the efficacy of fingolimod and natalizumab in preventing regional grey matter (GM) and white matter (WM) atrophy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) over 2 years.

Methods Patients with RRMS starting fingolimod (n=25) or natalizumab (n=30) underwent clinical examination and 3T MRI scans at baseline (month (M) 0), M6, M12 and M24. Seventeen healthy controls were also scanned at M0 and M24. Tensor-based morphometry and SPM12 were used to assess the longitudinal regional GM/WM volume changes.

Results At M0, no clinical or GM/WM volume differences were found between treatment groups. At M24, both drugs reduced relapse rate (p<0.001 for both) and stabilised disability. At M6 vs M0, both groups experienced significant atrophy of several areas in the cortex, deep GM nuclei and supratentorial WM. Significant bilateral cerebellar GM and WM atrophy occurred in fingolimod patients only. At M12 vs M6 and M24 vs M12, further supratentorial GM and WM atrophy occurred in both groups. Bilateral GM/WM cerebellar atrophy continued to progress in fingolimod patients only. Compared with natalizumab, fingolimod-treated patients showed a significant cerebellar GM/WM atrophy, mainly at M6 vs M0, but still occurring up to M24. Compared with fingolimod, natalizumab-treated patients had a small number of areas of GM atrophy in temporo-occipital regions at the different time-points.

Conclusions Natalizumab and fingolimod are associated with heterogeneous temporal and regional patterns of GM and WM atrophy progression. Compared with natalizumab, fingolimod-treated patients experience accelerated GM and WM atrophy in the cerebellum, while both drugs show minimal regional volumetric differences in supratentorial regions.

https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2019-322439

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Introduction

    Thanks to a better understanding of multiple sclerosis (MS) pathophysiology and the identification of novel therapeutic targets, effective new drugs have enabled a significant improvement of MS management during the past few years.1 It is now recognised that to modify the progression of irreversible clinical disability, reduction of inflammatory disease activity should be combined with prevention of neurodegeneration.2 3

    A great deal of effort has been put into quantifying neurodegeneration in vivo using MRI tools,2 enabling brain atrophy to be included as an outcome measure in several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in MS.2 3 A meta-analysis of these RCTs showed that treatment effect on brain atrophy is significantly associated with disability progression, and is independent of the effect of active MRI lesions.4

    Among the available treatments, fingolimod (FTY) and natalizumab (NAT) are effective second-line drugs approved for patients with relapsing-remitting (RR) MS with high disease activity.5 6 Although direct head-to-head comparisons are few, phase III RCTs7–10 and a recent observational study11 suggest that brain atrophy rates over 2 years are similar for FTY and NAT. Interestingly, data from RCTs and observational studies showed that both treatments positively influence brain atrophy accumulation, with different dynamics and mechanisms of action. NAT causes an early and paradoxically higher brain volume loss (‘pseudoatrophy’), possibly due to resolution of inflammation, followed by a lower rate of atrophy progression,9 10 12 whereas FTY seems to reduce brain atrophy progression early after treatment initiation,13 14 although pseudoatrophy might occur in cases with a higher baseline MRI activity.14

    Recently, using different approaches, the effectiveness of FTY and NAT in preventing atrophy in the grey matter (GM), white matter (WM) and clinically relevant central nervous system (CNS) structures has been investigated.3 FTY significantly reduced WM volume loss15 and GM atrophy progression, especially in deep GM,15–17 whereas NAT stabilised GM volume for up to 3 years.18–21 Other studies showed a significant GM atrophy progression, involving several cortico-subcortical regions and the cerebellum22–25 during the first 12 months of NAT treatment, sometimes associated with significant WM atrophy up to the second year of treatment.21 23

    Given the limited direct head-to-head comparisons between FTY and NAT, and the conflicting results obtained from observational studies, it remains unclear whether these two drugs similarly prevent GM and WM atrophy during the first years of treatment. A comparison of the dynamic patterns of regional brain volume loss occurring with FTY or NAT may help in an evaluation of their neuroprotective effects, and determine whether their efficacy is similar in brain compartments with different microstructure and resident cells.

    Here, we applied a voxel-based approach to compare the effects of FTY and NAT in preventing focal WM lesions and GM and WM atrophy progression, by exploring the longitudinal patterns of regional brain damage accumulation over 2 years of treatment.

    Methods

    Study design

    This was a single centre, prospective, longitudinal, open-label, non-randomised study conducted between September 2011 and July 2016, as previously described.11 RRMS starting treatment with FTY or NAT according to the Italian Medicines Agency (Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco) criteria were recruited (table 1) (see online supplementary methods for additional details).

    Supplemental material

    View this table:
    Table 1

    AIFA criteria to start treatment with FTY or NAT in RRMS

    All patients underwent clinical and MRI evaluation at baseline (month (M) 0) (±10 days from treatment initiation), month 6 (M6) (±3 days), 12 (M12) (±7 days) and 24 (M24) (±7 days). Analyses were performed considering only those patients who completed the entire study. Approval was received from the local ethical standards committee, and written informed consent was obtained from all study participants prior to enrolment.

    Clinical evaluation

    At each visit, the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score, relapses and annualised relapse rate (ARR) were assessed by a neurologist unaware of the MRI results.

    At M0, treatment history and ARR during the year before treatment initiation were also recorded. At follow-up, confirmed disability progression was established when EDSS score increased ≥1.0 point if baseline EDSS score was ≥1.0 or ≥1.5 points if baseline score was 0,26 27 and was sustained for 3 months.

    MRI acquisition

    Using a 3.0 Tesla scanner (Intera, Philips Medical Systems, Best, The Netherlands), without major scanner hardware or software upgrade during the study, the following brain images were acquired: (1) dual-echo turbo spin-echo; (2) 3D T 1-weighted fast field echo; (3) postcontrast (0.1 mmol/kg of gadolinium (Gd)-DTPA; acquisition delay: 5 min) T 1-weighted inversion recovery sequence (see online supplementary methods for details).

    Lesion analysis

    At each visit, T 2-hyperintense and Gd-enhancing lesion volumes were measured using a local thresholding segmentation technique (Jim 6.0 software, www.xinapse.com) by consensus of two observers blinded to the subjects’ data. The numbers of Gd-enhancing lesions and new T 2-hyperintense lesions were also counted.

    T2-hyperintense lesion probability maps

    For each patient, binarised masks of the T 2-hyperintense WM lesions were obtained, rigidly coregistered to the 3D T 1-weighted scans (using the transformation calculated by registering the T 2-weighted to the 3D T 1-weighted image), then transformed to the mid-point average template used in tensor-based morphometry, normalised to standard space (see below for details). These were then smoothed using an 8 mm Gaussian kernel and averaged across patients to obtain T 2-hyperintense lesion probability maps for each of the two treatment groups.

    Global brain atrophy assessment

    After T 1-hypointense lesion refilling, normalised brain volume and longitudinal percentage brain volume change were assessed from the 3D T 1-weighted images using SIENAx and SIENA software.

    MRI-derived volumes were also compared with a group of healthy controls (HC) (n=17, 10 females; mean age (SD)=34.9 (11.0) years) scanned for research purposes using the same MRI scanner and protocol at M0 and M24 and who were age-matched and sex-matched to both treatment groups (p≥0.24).

    Regional brain atrophy assessment

    Voxel-based morphometry was used to map between-group regional differences in volumes at M0. Tensor-based morphometry,28 as implemented in SPM12 (www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm), was used to map regional volume changes over time within and between patient groups and HC. Serial longitudinal registration was used to align scans of the four study time-points for patients with RRMS and of the two time-points for HC.29 The method is based on group-wise alignment of each subject’s scans and incorporates a bias field correction. It produces a mid-point average template image.

    The rate of volume change was quantified from images of the Jacobian determinants. For our analysis, the differences between pairs of Jacobian determinant images were calculated and scaled to take account of the follow-up duration. The values represent the ratio between volume differences and the volume in the mid-point average template, which was used as reference; negative values indicate tissue volume loss, positive values volume increase.

    The mid-point average template was used for group-wise alignment among subjects by applying the postprocessing pipeline for voxel-based morphometry in SPM12 and Diffeomorphic Anatomical Registration using Exponentiated Lie algebra (DARTEL) to estimate deformations, as described in the online supplementary methods. Finally, Jacobian determinant images were spatially normalised and smoothed with an 8 mm Gaussian kernel without applying modulation. Moreover, voxel-based morphometry analysis was performed on baseline 3D T 1-weighted images to assess regional GM and WM atrophy (see online supplementary methods for details).

    Statistical analysis

    Variables were reported as mean and SD, median and IQR or count and relative frequencies. Baseline characteristics and within-group and between-group longitudinal changes were compared using Mann-Whitney, Pearson’s χ², Fisher exact or Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests as appropriate. SPSS software (V.22) was used for statistical analysis with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.

    Using a general linear model and the theory of Gaussian fields,30 between-group comparisons of T 2-hyperintense lesion probability maps, GM atrophy and WM atrophy at M0 were performed using SPM12 and an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), including age, sex, the ARR in the year before treatment start, the number of baseline Gd-enhancing lesions and the normalisation factor derived from SIENAx (which can be considered as a measure of head size) as covariates.

    An ANCOVA was used to assess within-group and between-group longitudinal changes in T 2-hyperintense lesion distribution and GM and WM volumes. All analyses were adjusted for age, sex, the ARR in the year before treatment start and the number of baseline Gd-enhancing lesions. To limit the analysis to the GM or WM, masks obtained from the GM or WM DARTEL templates, transformed to standard space, smoothed and thresholded at 0.25, were used. T 2-hyperintense lesion probability maps, voxel-based morphometry and tensor-based morphometry results were assessed at a threshold of p<0.001, uncorrected for multiple comparisons, with a cluster extent ≥10 voxels.

    Data availability

    The dataset used and analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

    Results

    Study population

    From 104 consecutive patients with RRMS starting FTY or NAT, 25 treated with FTY and 30 with NAT completed the study and were included in the analysis. Figure 1 shows the study flowchart and summarises the main inclusion and exclusion criteria.

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Study flowchart. Main inclusion and exclusion criteria for patients with RRMS and study flowchart. AIFA, Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (Italian Medicine Agency); EDSS, Expanded Disability Status Scale; FTY, fingolimod; NAT, natalizumab; RRMS, relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

    Baseline findings

    Table 2 summarises the main baseline characteristics of the two groups of patients according to treatment type.

    View this table:
    Table 2

    Main demographic, clinical and MRI findings at baseline in patients with RRMS treated with FTY or NAT

    Demographic, clinical and conventional MRI findings did not differ between FTY-treated and NAT-treated patients. In both groups, T 2-hyperintense lesions were mostly located in the bilateral corona radiata and periventricular WM, with FTY-treated patients showing a higher prevalence of T 2-hyperintense lesions in some clusters in fronto-parieto-occipital WM regions and in the corona radiata, bilaterally, but not in infratentorial regions (figure 2) (p<0.001, uncorrected). At M0, compared to HC, both treatment groups showed significant atrophy involving several cortical regions, deep GM nuclei and mainly periventricular WM regions (p<0.001, uncorrected), without differences between treatment groups (figures 3 and 4).

    Figure 2
    Figure 2

    T 2-hyperintense lesion distribution and evolution during the study. (A) T 2-hyperintense lesion probability maps in FTY-treated (blue/light blue colour-coded) and NAT-treated patients (green/light green colour-coded) at baseline. Lesion probability maps were thresholded to show only voxels with lesion frequency >5%, up to a maximum lesion frequency of 40%. (B) SPM analysis showing significant longitudinal changes in lesion distribution (red/yellow colour-coded for increase, blue/light blue for decrease, p<0.001 uncorrected, cluster extent=10) at M6 vs M0, M12 vs M6, M24 vs M12 and M24 vs M0. (C) SPM analysis showing significant differences in lesion distribution between study groups (red/yellow colour-coded, p<0.001 uncorrected, cluster extent=10) at M0, M6, M12, M24. Images are shown in neurological orientation. Results are superimposed on the custom GM template. See text for further details. FTY, fingolimod; LPM, lesion probability map; M0, baseline; M6, month 6; M12, month 12; M24, month 24; NAT, natalizumab; SPM, statistical parametric mapping.

    Figure 3
    Figure 3

    GM volume changes in the two study groups at the different study time-points. SPM analysis showing significant differences in GM volume (yellow/red colour-coded, p<0.001 uncorrected, cluster extent=10) superimposed on the custom GM template. (A) Clusters showing significant GM atrophy in FTY-treated and NAT-treated patients compared with HC at M0. (B) Clusters showing significant progression of GM atrophy in FTY-treated and NAT-treated patients and between-group differences at M6 vs M0, M12 vs M6 and M24 vs M12. Images are shown in neurological orientation. See text for further details. FTY, fingolimod; GM, grey matter; HC, healthy controls; M0, baseline; M6, month 6; M12, month 12; M24, month 24; NAT, natalizumab; SPM, statistical parametric mapping.

    Figure 4
    Figure 4

    WM volume changes in the two study groups at the different study time-points. SPM analysis showing significant differences in WM volume (yellow/red colour-coded, p<0.001 uncorrected, cluster extent=10) superimposed on the custom WM template. (A) Clusters showing significant WM atrophy in FTY-treated and NAT-treated patients compared with HC at M0. (B) Clusters showing significant progression of WM atrophy in FTY-treated and NAT-treated patients and between-group differences at M6 vs M0, M12 vs M6 and M24 vs M12. Images are shown in neurological orientation. See text for further details. FTY, fingolimod; HC, healthy controls; M0, baseline; M6, month 6; M12, month 12; M24, month 24; NAT, natalizumab; SPM, statistical parametric mapping; WM, white matter.

    Evolution of clinical and conventional MRI findings

    Table 3 shows the results of the clinical and conventional MRI assessments at follow-up in the two study groups.

    View this table:
    Table 3

    Main changes in clinical and MRI variables during the follow-up in patients with RRMS starting FTY or NAT

    Both drugs significantly reduced the ARR (p<0.001), with NAT being superior to FTY (p=0.04). Both treatment groups stabilised EDSS score at M24, without between-group differences in the prevalence of confirmed disability progression at M24 (p=0.49).

    At M24, both groups showed a significant accumulation of new T 2-hyperintense lesions (p=0.001 in FTY and 0.01 in NAT), with a significantly lower number and prevalence of new T 2-hyperintense in NAT compared with FTY (p=0.02 and 0.03, respectively). Overall, T 2-hyperintense lesion volume increased in the FTY group (p<0.001) and decreased in the NAT group (p=0.005). No differences in Gd-enhancing lesions were found between treatment groups at each time-point (p-value=0.27). At M24, in both groups, significant whole-brain atrophy was found (p<0.001 for both), without differences between groups, while compared with HC (percentage brain volume change=−0.18%), both treatment groups had a greater percentage brain volume change (p=0.004 for FTY; 0.03 for NAT).

    Evolution of T2 lesion probability maps

    At M6 vs M0, FTY-treated patients had an increased prevalence of T 2-hyperintense lesions, bilaterally, in some clusters located in the forceps major and corona radiata, as well as decreased prevalence of T 2-hyperintense lesions in some parieto-occipital regions and corona radiata, bilaterally. At the subsequent time-points, a few small clusters of increased prevalence of T 2-hyperintense lesions in supratentorial WM were detected, as well as a decreased prevalence of T 2-hyperintense lesions in the right forceps minor and right cerebellar WM at M24 vs M12 (p<0.001, uncorrected, figure 2).

    NAT-treated patients showed minimal changes in T 2-hyperintense lesion distribution, with both increased and decreased lesion occurrence in a few small clusters in bilateral periventricular WM, the genu and splenium of the corpus callosum, the forceps minor and right internal capsule (p<0.001, uncorrected, figure 2).

    At between-group comparisons, a few small clusters with a higher probability of T 2-hyperintense lesions in FTY compared with NAT, mainly located in the right corona radiata (p<0.001, uncorrected), were seen (figure 2).

    Evolution of regional GM and WM atrophy

    Assessment of regional changes in GM and WM volumes over time are shown in figures 3–5.

    Figure 5
    Figure 5

    GM and WM volume changes in the two study groups and in HC at M24 compared with M0. SPM analysis showing significant changes in GM and WM volumes (yellow/red colour-coded, p<0.001 uncorrected, cluster extent=10) superimposed on the custom GM and WM template at M24 vs M0. (A) Clusters showing significant within-group longitudinal progression of GM and WM atrophy in FTY-treated patients, NAT-treated patients and HC. (B) Clusters showing significant between-group differences in longitudinal progression of GM and WM atrophy in FTY vs HC, NAT vs HC and FTY vs NAT. Images are shown in neurological orientation. See text for further details. FTY, fingolimod; GM, grey matter; HC, healthy controls; M0, baseline; M24, month 24; NAT, natalizumab; SPM, statistical parametric mapping; WM, white matter.

    FTY-treated patients

    At M6 vs M0, there was a significant progression of GM atrophy in FTY-treated patients in several cortical regions, deep GM nuclei and cerebellar GM, and a significant progression of WM atrophy of the majority of WM tracts and cerebellar WM (p<0.001, uncorrected). At M12 vs M6, further GM atrophy progression involved the posterior cingulate cortex and cerebellar GM, while WM atrophy significantly occurred in the cerebellar WM and in small clusters of the posterior cingulum and splenium of the corpus callosum (p<0.001, uncorrected). At M24 vs M12, FTY-treated patients showed additional atrophy of several cortical regions, deep GM nuclei and cerebellar GM and diffuse atrophy of infratentorial and supratentorial WM (p<0.001, uncorrected).

    NAT-treated patients

    At M6 vs M0, there was a significant progression of GM atrophy in NAT-treated patients in several cortical and deep GM regions, and significant WM atrophy of many supratentorial WM tracts (p<0.001, uncorrected). At M12 vs M6, further GM atrophy occurred in small bilateral cortical clusters, while WM atrophy involved mainly periventricular WM and corona radiata, bilaterally (p<0.001, uncorrected). At M24 vs M12, NAT-treated patients experienced further GM atrophy of several cortical regions, deep GM nuclei and small clusters of cerebellar GM, bilaterally, and atrophy of medulla oblongata WM and of the majority of supratentorial WM tracts (p<0.001, uncorrected).

    Between-group comparisons

    Compared with NAT, FTY-treated patients showed more significant atrophy progression of the cerebellar GM and WM (being most evident at M6 vs M0, but still occurring at the subsequent time-points) and of a few additional small supratentorial clusters (between-group p<0.001, uncorrected). Compared with FTY, NAT-treated patients showed more significant GM atrophy in some temporo-occipital clusters at M6 vs M0, and of a few clusters in frontotemporal cortices and in the right cerebellar GM at M24 vs M12 (between-group p<0.001, uncorrected).

    Comparisons with HC

    The analysis considering M24 vs M0 showed that, during the study period, HC had significant GM atrophy in some small clusters of cortical regions and the cerebellum, while both FTY-treated and NAT-treated patients showed widespread atrophy of supratentorial and infratentorial GM and WM regions, with only FTY-treated patients showing cerebellar atrophy progression over time (figure 5). Compared with HC, both treatment groups showed significant GM atrophy of some cortical regions and deep GM nuclei, and WM atrophy of several WM tracts, while only FTY-treated patients showed significant progression of cerebellar GM and WM atrophy (between-group p<0.001, uncorrected) (figure 5).

    Discussion

    In line with RCTs,7 8 26 27 31 we found that both FTY and NAT promoted a significant reduction of disease activity and prevention of disability progression that were slightly superior with NAT.32 Additionally, both FTY and NAT significantly influenced WM lesion burden and the evolution of regional GM and WM atrophy. Of note, regional volume loss was more evident in FTY-treated patients, who experienced significant progression of cerebellar GM and WM atrophy.

    Globally, FTY-treated patients experienced a significant increase in T 2-hyperintense lesion volume over 2 years, while NAT-treated patients showed a significant reduction in T 2-hyperintense lesion volume. Although the 2-year brain atrophy rates were similar for the two drugs but higher than HC, brain volume loss was lower than the recently suggested MS pathological threshold (−0.4%/year)33 and those found in phase III RCTs,7–10 thus suggesting that the action of these drugs goes beyond the reduction of focal lesion accumulation.

    The regional analysis of T 2 lesion probability maps revealed different effects of NAT and FTY in limiting inflammation and demyelination in the first 6 months after their initiation, with the occurrence of WM clusters with new T 2-hyperintense lesions after FTY and substantial stability of WM lesions with NAT, supporting a stronger and earlier effect of NAT compared with FTY.6 32 However, once both treatments became fully effective, they prevented new focal lesion accumulation to a similar degree.

    Of note, in the first 6 months, both treatment groups also showed clusters with a decreased prevalence of T 2-hyperintense lesions, combined with significant GM and WM atrophy of several supratentorial areas, including cortical and deep GM and several WM tracts. Since a higher rate of atrophy progression has been seen in the period immediately following the initiation of highly effective anti-inflammatory drugs such as NAT9 12 21 23 and FTY,14 especially in patients with a high baseline MRI activity, it is likely that the resolution of inflammation explains the reduction in T 2-hyperintense lesion volume and this ‘pseudoatrophy’.

    Although previous studies have suggested that pseudoatrophy predominantly involves the WM,21 23 we found that this process may also be present in the GM. However, several mechanisms, independent from pseudoatrophy, might contribute to this early GM atrophy progression, including GM lesion accumulation (not properly evaluable from the images we acquired), or GM damage secondary to degeneration of fibres passing through WM lesions.

    Because we acquired MRI at M6, a time-point not evaluated in previous studies,12 21 23 we were able to show that GM and WM atrophy were more prevalent in the first 6 months compared with subsequent time-points, thus suggesting that pseudoatrophy occurs mainly in the months close to treatment initiation. Clearly, heterogeneities in patient characteristics (eg, a lower baseline MRI activity), differences in follow-up duration and the application of different methods to quantify atrophy could also help to explain possible discrepancies between studies.

    Interestingly, both treatments resulted in substantial stability of the T 2-hyperintense lesion distribution and GM and WM volumes between M6 and M12. It is likely that the ongoing processes of neurodegeneration were counteracted by reparative mechanisms (eg, remyelination), which may occur for only a limited period of time after treatment start, as also suggested by an experimental study showing that FTY improved myelin recovery after acute demyelination, but that its effects on chronic demyelination were limited.34

    During the second year, diffuse progression of GM and WM atrophy was found with both treatments. Although in line with previous studies,15 17 21–24 our findings seem counterintuitive, since both drugs effectively prevented focal lesion accumulation and only limited regional volume loss occurred at M12 compared with M6. Atrophy is expected to be particularly pronounced in those patients with RRMS who have a more severe disease and call for second-line treatments. Treatment effects on brain volume loss could be at least partially independent from disease activity.33 In addition, brain atrophy represents an end-stage phenomenon after several months of structural damage accumulation. Accordingly, the significant progression of regional brain atrophy occurring in the second year may still be attributable, at least partially, to disease activity that occurred before treatment start. Finally, the strong anti-inflammatory effects of NAT6 and the pleiotropic effects of FTY5 may limit the amount of inflammatory infiltrates, microglia activation, astrogliosis and gliotic scar formation in the CNS. Since all these pathological processes could paradoxically stabilise regional volumes, their prevention, promoted by NAT or FTY, may also help to explain the brain volume loss observed in our study.

    Interestingly, we found that only FTY-treated patients showed significant progression of cerebellar GM and WM atrophy mainly between M0 and M6, but still developing at subsequent time-points. By applying voxel-based morphometry and Freesurfer, one previous study showed that there was cerebellar GM atrophy up to the second year following NAT start,23 while another showed significantly lower cerebellar GM atrophy with FTY compared with placebo, but without evaluating whether the rate of cerebellar volume loss was statistically significant in FTY or higher than in HC.17

    Several factors could help to explain these unexpected findings in the cerebellum in our study. Since FTY-treated patients did not show a higher occurrence of infratentorial T 2-hyperintense lesions or a higher rate of brainstem/cerebellar relapses or disability, cerebellar atrophy may not be a direct consequence of a higher disease activity affecting infratentorial regions. Additionally, since the peripheral effects of FTY influence all brain regions similarly, and all GM and WM regions seem to take up FTY,5 cerebellar atrophy is not explained by heterogeneous action on lymphocyte migration or drug distribution in the CNS.

    It is likely that the direct neuroprotective effects of FTY are heterogeneous across different brain regions. Experimental studies showed that, in contrast to other brain regions such as the corpus callosum,34 35 FTY does not enhance cerebellar remyelination.36 Moreover, FTY may influence the morphology of Bergmann glia,37 a specialised type of astrocyte important for cerebellar development and physiology. Of note, FTY has been demonstrated to increase the levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor, a neurotrophin involved in neuronal survival, differentiation and function.38 39 Interestingly, increased brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels promoted by FTY have been consistently demonstrated in several brain regions, but with conflicting results in the cerebellum,38 39 suggesting that the neuroprotective effects of FTY might be limited in the cerebellum, possibly due to differences in astrocytes, oligodendrocytes and neurons and in their gene expression at this level.

    Although further studies with larger cohorts of patients with MS and a longer follow-up are needed to confirm our results and their persistence over time, our study underlines the importance of regional assessment of brain damage progression when comparing the neuroprotective effects of different treatments.

    Our study is not without limitations. First, two relatively small cohorts of patients with RRMS were recruited. However, it is challenging to acquire clinical and MRI measures at well-scheduled time-points in a clinical setting. Moreover, patients with RRMS started FTY and NAT based on to real-life clinical indications rather than being randomised. Differences in baseline characteristics, although not statistically significant, may have influenced the results obtained. Clearly, our results should be interpreted cautiously, and larger randomised studies are needed to confirm our findings. Second, a longer follow-up is needed to determine whether the positive effects of both drugs on regional WM lesion distribution and atrophy progression have a long-term impact on clinical outcomes. Third, a more comprehensive evaluation of cortical and microstructural damage with appropriate MRI pulse sequences may help to clarify the ways in which these treatments give beneficial effects.

    In conclusion, this study confirmed the anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effects of both FTY and NAT, with heterogeneous temporal and regional patterns of GM and WM atrophy progression after their initiation. Compared with NAT, FTY-treated patients experienced accelerated GM and WM atrophy in the cerebellum, while the two drugs gave rise to minimal differences in volume changes in supratentorial regions.

    References

    1. ↵
      2. Filippi M ,
      3. Bar-Or A ,
      4. Piehl F , et al
      . Multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2018;4:43.doi:10.1038/s41572-018-0041-4
      OpenUrl
    2. ↵
      2. Rocca MA ,
      3. Battaglini M ,
      4. Benedict RHB , et al
      . Brain MRI atrophy quantification in MS: from methods to clinical application. Neurology 2017;88:403–13.doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000003542
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    3. ↵
      2. Rocca MA ,
      3. Preziosa P ,
      4. Filippi M
      . Application of advanced MRI techniques to monitor pharmacologic and rehabilitative treatment in multiple sclerosis: current status and future perspectives. Expert Rev Neurother 2019;19:835–66.doi:10.1080/14737175.2019.1555038
      OpenUrl
    4. ↵
      2. Sormani MP ,
      3. Arnold DL ,
      4. De Stefano N
      . Treatment effect on brain atrophy correlates with treatment effect on disability in multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2014;75:43–9.doi:10.1002/ana.24018
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    5. ↵
      2. Hunter SF ,
      3. Bowen JD ,
      4. Reder AT
      . The direct effects of fingolimod in the central nervous system: implications for relapsing multiple sclerosis. CNS Drugs 2016;30:135–47.doi:10.1007/s40263-015-0297-0
      OpenUrl
    6. ↵
      2. Sellebjerg F ,
      3. Cadavid D ,
      4. Steiner D , et al
      . Exploring potential mechanisms of action of natalizumab in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 2016;9:31–43.doi:10.1177/1756285615615257
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    7. ↵
      2. Calabresi PA ,
      3. Radue E-W ,
      4. Goodin D , et al
      . Safety and efficacy of fingolimod in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (freedoms II): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Neurol 2014;13:545–56.doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70049-3
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    8. ↵
      2. Kappos L ,
      3. Radue E-W ,
      4. O'Connor P , et al
      . A placebo-controlled trial of oral fingolimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2010;362:387–401.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0909494
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    9. ↵
      2. Miller DH ,
      3. Soon D ,
      4. Fernando KT , et al
      . Mri outcomes in a placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab in relapsing MS. Neurology 2007;68:1390–401.doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000260064.77700.fd
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    10. ↵
      2. Radue E-W ,
      3. Stuart WH ,
      4. Calabresi PA , et al
      . Natalizumab plus interferon beta-1a reduces lesion formation in relapsing multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 2010;292:28–35.doi:10.1016/j.jns.2010.02.012
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    11. ↵
      2. Preziosa P ,
      3. Rocca MA ,
      4. Riccitelli GC , et al
      . Effects of natalizumab and fingolimod on clinical, cognitive, and magnetic resonance imaging measures in multiple sclerosis. Neurotherapeutics 2019. doi:doi:10.1007/s13311-019-00781-w. [Epub ahead of print: 26 Aug 2019].
    12. ↵
      2. Sastre-Garriga J ,
      3. Tur C ,
      4. Pareto D , et al
      . Brain atrophy in natalizumab-treated patients: a 3-year follow-up. Mult Scler 2015;21:749–56.doi:10.1177/1352458514556300
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    13. ↵
      2. Kappos L ,
      3. Radue E-W ,
      4. Chin P , et al
      . Onset of clinical and MRI efficacy occurs early after fingolimod treatment initiation in relapsing multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 2016;263:354–60.doi:10.1007/s00415-015-7978-y
      OpenUrl
    14. ↵
      2. De Stefano N ,
      3. Silva DG ,
      4. Barnett MH
      . Effect of fingolimod on brain volume loss in patients with multiple sclerosis. CNS Drugs 2017;31:289–305.doi:10.1007/s40263-017-0415-2
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    15. ↵
      2. Gaetano L ,
      3. Häring DA ,
      4. Radue E-W , et al
      . Fingolimod effect on gray matter, thalamus, and white matter in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2018;90:e1324–32.doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000005292
      OpenUrl
    16. ↵
      2. Yousuf F ,
      3. Dupuy SL ,
      4. Tauhid S , et al
      . A two-year study using cerebral gray matter volume to assess the response to fingolimod therapy in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 2017;383:221–9.doi:10.1016/j.jns.2017.10.019
      OpenUrl
    17. ↵
      2. Bajrami A ,
      3. Pitteri M ,
      4. Castellaro M , et al
      . The effect of fingolimod on focal and diffuse grey matter damage in active MS patients. J Neurol 2018;265:2154–61.doi:10.1007/s00415-018-8952-2
      OpenUrl
    18. ↵
      2. Khalid F ,
      3. Tauhid S ,
      4. Chua AS , et al
      . A longitudinal uncontrolled study of cerebral gray matter volume in patients receiving natalizumab for multiple sclerosis. Int J Neurosci 2017;127:396–403.doi:10.1080/00207454.2016.1185421
      OpenUrl
    19. ↵
      2. Mattioli F ,
      3. Stampatori C ,
      4. Bellomi F , et al
      . Natalizumab significantly improves cognitive impairment over three years in MS: pattern of disability progression and preliminary MRI findings. PLoS One 2015;10:e0131803.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0131803
    20. ↵
      2. Portaccio E ,
      3. Stromillo ML ,
      4. Goretti B , et al
      . Natalizumab may reduce cognitive changes and brain atrophy rate in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis--a prospective, non-randomized pilot study. Eur J Neurol 2013;20:986–90.doi:10.1111/j.1468-1331.2012.03882.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    21. ↵
      2. Vidal-Jordana A ,
      3. Sastre-Garriga J ,
      4. Pérez-Miralles F , et al
      . Early brain pseudoatrophy while on natalizumab therapy is due to white matter volume changes. Mult Scler 2013;19:1175–81.doi:10.1177/1352458512473190
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    22. ↵
      2. Rinaldi F ,
      3. Calabrese M ,
      4. Seppi D , et al
      . Natalizumab strongly suppresses cortical pathology in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2012;18:1760–7.doi:10.1177/1352458512447704
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    23. ↵
      2. Ciampi E ,
      3. Pareto D ,
      4. Sastre-Garriga J , et al
      . Grey matter atrophy is associated with disability increase in natalizumab-treated patients. Mult Scler 2017;23:556–66.doi:10.1177/1352458516656808
      OpenUrl
    24. ↵
      2. Koskimäki F ,
      3. Bernard J ,
      4. Yong J , et al
      . Gray matter atrophy in multiple sclerosis despite clinical and lesion stability during natalizumab treatment. PLoS One 2018;13:e0209326.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0209326
    25. ↵
      2. Sotirchos ES ,
      3. Gonzalez-Caldito N ,
      4. Dewey BE , et al
      . Effect of disease-modifying therapies on subcortical gray matter atrophy in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2019;1352458519826364:1352458519826364.doi:10.1177/1352458519826364
    26. ↵
      2. Polman CH ,
      3. O'Connor PW ,
      4. Havrdova E , et al
      . A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006;354:899–910.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa044397
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    27. ↵
      2. Rudick RA ,
      3. Stuart WH ,
      4. Calabresi PA , et al
      . Natalizumab plus interferon beta-1a for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006;354:911–23.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa044396
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    28. ↵
      2. Leow AD ,
      3. Klunder AD ,
      4. Jack CR , et al
      . Longitudinal stability of MRI for mapping brain change using tensor-based morphometry. Neuroimage 2006;31:627–40.doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.12.013
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    29. ↵
      2. Ashburner J ,
      3. Ridgway GR
      . Symmetric diffeomorphic modeling of longitudinal structural MRI. Front Neurosci 2012;6:197.doi:10.3389/fnins.2012.00197
    30. ↵
      2. Friston KJ ,
      3. Holmes AP ,
      4. Poline JB , et al
      . Analysis of fMRI time-series revisited. Neuroimage 1995;2:45–53.doi:10.1006/nimg.1995.1007
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    31. ↵
      2. Cohen JA ,
      3. Barkhof F ,
      4. Comi G , et al
      . Oral fingolimod or intramuscular interferon for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2010;362:402–15.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0907839
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    32. ↵
      2. Tsivgoulis G ,
      3. Katsanos AH ,
      4. Mavridis D , et al
      . The efficacy of natalizumab versus fingolimod for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review, indirect evidence from randomized placebo-controlled trials and meta-analysis of observational head-to-head trials. PLoS One 2016;11:e0163296.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0163296
    33. ↵
      2. De Stefano N ,
      3. Tomic D ,
      4. Radue E-W , et al
      . Effect of fingolimod on diffuse brain tissue damage in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2016;7:98–101.doi:10.1016/j.msard.2016.03.017
      OpenUrl
    34. ↵
      2. Slowik A ,
      3. Schmidt T ,
      4. Beyer C , et al
      . The sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor agonist FTY720 is neuroprotective after cuprizone-induced CNS demyelination. Br J Pharmacol 2015;172:80–92.doi:10.1111/bph.12938
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    35. ↵
      2. Jackson SJ ,
      3. Giovannoni G ,
      4. Baker D
      . Fingolimod modulates microglial activation to augment markers of remyelination. J Neuroinflammation 2011;8:76.doi:10.1186/1742-2094-8-76
    36. ↵
      2. Alme MN ,
      3. Nystad AE ,
      4. Bo L , et al
      . Fingolimod does not enhance cerebellar remyelination in the cuprizone model. J Neuroimmunol 2015;285:180–6.doi:10.1016/j.jneuroim.2015.06.006
      OpenUrl
    37. ↵
      2. López-Juárez A ,
      3. Morales-Lázaro S ,
      4. Sánchez-Sánchez R , et al
      . Expression of LPP3 in Bergmann glia is required for proper cerebellar sphingosine-1-phosphate metabolism/signaling and development. Glia 2011;59:577–89.doi:10.1002/glia.21126
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    38. ↵
      2. Deogracias R ,
      3. Yazdani M ,
      4. Dekkers MPJ , et al
      . Fingolimod, a sphingosine-1 phosphate receptor modulator, increases BDNF levels and improves symptoms of a mouse model of Rett syndrome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012;109:14230–5.doi:10.1073/pnas.1206093109
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    39. ↵
      2. Smith PA ,
      3. Schmid C ,
      4. Zurbruegg S , et al
      . Fingolimod inhibits brain atrophy and promotes brain-derived neurotrophic factor in an animal model of multiple sclerosis. J Neuroimmunol 2018;318:103–13.doi:10.1016/j.jneuroim.2018.02.016
      OpenUrl

    Supplementary materials

    • Supplementary Data

      This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

    Footnotes

    • Contributors PP: drafting/revising the manuscript, MRI acquisition and analysis and interpretation of the data. MAR: drafting/revising the manuscript, study concept, MRI acquisition and analysis and interpretation of the data. EP and LS: drafting/revising the manuscript, MRI data postprocessing and interpretation of the data. LM and MR: patient enrolment and interpretation of the data. MF: drafting/revising the manuscript, study concept, MRI acquisition and analysis and interpretation of the data. He also acted as study supervisor.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests Potential conflicts of interest outside the submitted work are as follows. PP received speakers honoraria from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono and ExceMED. MAR received speakers honoraria from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Genzyme, Teva, Merck Serono, Roche, Celgene and Bayer and receives research support from the Italian Ministry of Health, MS Society of Canada and Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla. LM has received personal compensation for consulting, serving on a scientific advisory board, speaking, or other activities with Sanofi-Genzyme, Novartis, Teva, Merck-Serono, Biogen, Roche, Excemed. MF Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Neurology; received compensation for consulting services and/or speaking activities from Bayer, Biogen Idec, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries and receives research support from Biogen Idec, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Italian Ministry of Health, Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla and ARiSLA (Fondazione Italiana di Ricerca per la SLA).

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Data availability statement Data are available on reasonable request. The dataset used and analysed during the current study is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.