Immune reconstitution therapy (IRT) in multiple sclerosis: the rationale
Immunotherapy of multiple sclerosis (MS) and other neuroimmune diseases is rapidly evolving. For the past 25 years, there has been an accelerating inclusion of new immunomodulating drugs. Based on their molecular construction and their basic mechanism of action, immunotherapeutic agents belong to the following categories: (1) cytotoxic drugs, (2) synthetic immunomodulators, (3) monoclonal antibodies, (4) vaccines (T cell vaccines, antigen vaccines), (5) oral tolerizing agents, (6) modalities that act as indirect immunosuppressants (plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulins [IVIG]), and (7) cellular therapies. MS immunotherapies may also be classified in a different way, into treatments that are given continuously (chronic treatments) and medications that are applied intermittently (IRTs). The principle behind the latter is depletion of the immune system that allows it to rebuild itself. Upon its reconstitution/resetting, the immune system regains the ability to respond to infections and survey the periphery for cancer. An IRT by definition is given at short intermittent courses and not continuously. IRT modalities were shown to induce long-term remission of MS that, in some cases, is close to the definition of a “cure.” There are cohorts of patients having been treated with the IRTs, alemtuzumab, and HSCT, who experience—under these modalities—no evidence of disease activity (NEDA) for over 10 years. Most importantly, IRTs cause radical changes in the lymphocyte repertoire after the reconstitution phase that may explain the long-term beneficial effects of IRT and the possibility of re-induction of self-tolerance to self/myelin antigens. In comparison, a chronic treatment cannot result in cure of the autoimmune reactivity, because it only blocks the immune system, as long as it is given; it cannot therefore radically affect the immunopathogenesis of the disease. The risks of adverse events related to immune suppression (such as opportunistic infections and secondary malignancies) with IRTs are lower and front-loaded, whereas the common side effects of chronic immunomodulation are higher and accumulate with time. In conclusion, IRT provides a novel concept for MS therapy with substantial advantages over chronic immunosuppression. IRT therapies have shown a significantly higher level of efficacy in MS. The “Holy grail” of the treatment of autoimmunity, which is to re-induce the disrupted self-tolerance, seems to be achievable—at least in part—with this approach. Moreover, the benefits of IRT, administered in short pulses, include significantly higher adherence to treatment and lower risks for accumulative side effects that are typically associated with chronic immunosuppression.
KeywordsImmune reconstitution therapy (IRT) Multiple sclerosis (MS) Autoimmune diseases Autoimmunity
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflict of interest to declare in relation to the current manuscript.
- 1.Zhang J, Markovic-Plese S, Lacet B, Raus J, Weiner HL, Hafler DA. Increased frequency of interleukin 2-responsive T cells specific for myelin basic protein and proteolipid protein in peripheral blood and cerebrospinal fluid of patients with multiple sclerosis. J Exp Med. 1994;179:973–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Cappellani R, Bergsland N, Weinstock-Guttman B, Kennedy C, Carl E, Ramasamy DP, et al. Subcortical deep gray matter pathology in patients with multiple sclerosis is associated with white matter lesion burden and atrophy but not with cortical atrophy: a diffusion tensor MRI study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014;35:912–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Geurts JJ, Bo L, Pouwels PJ, Castelijns JA, Polman CH, Barkhof F. Cortical lesions in multiple sclerosis: combined postmortem MR imaging and histopathology. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005;26:572–7.Google Scholar
- 32.Popescu BF, Pirko I, Lucchinetti CF. Pathology of multiple sclerosis: where do we stand? Continuum (Minneap Minn). 2013;19:901–21.Google Scholar
- 46.Li Y, Xu L. Evaluation of TCR repertoire diversity in patients after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Stem Cell Investig. 2015;2:17.Google Scholar
- 47.Gallacher L, Murdoch B, Wu DM, Karanu FN, Keeney M, Bhatia M. Isolation and characterization of human CD34(−)Lin(−) and CD34(+)Lin(−) hematopoietic stem cells using cell surface markers AC133 and CD7. Blood. 2000;95:2813–20.Google Scholar
- 58.Karussis DM, Slavin S, Ben-Nun A, Ovadia H, Vourka-Karussis U, Lehmann D, et al. Chronic-relapsing experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (CR-EAE): treatment and induction of tolerance, with high dose cyclophosphamide followed by syngeneic bone marrow transplantation. J Neuroimmunol. 1992;39:201–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 59.Karussis DM, Slavin S, Lehmann D, Mizrachi-Koll R, Abramsky O, Ben-Nun A. Prevention of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis and induction of tolerance with acute immunosuppression followed by syngeneic bone marrow transplantation. J Immunol. 1992;148:1693–8.Google Scholar
- 61.Karussis DM, Vourka-Karussis U, Lehmann D, Ovadia H, Mizrachi-Koll R, Ben-Nun A, et al. Prevention and reversal of adoptively transferred, chronic relapsing experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis with a single high dose cytoreductive treatment followed by syngeneic bone marrow transplantation. J Clin Invest. 1993;92:765–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 62.Burt RK, Cohen BA, Russell E, Spero K, Joshi A, Oyama Y, et al. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for progressive multiple sclerosis: failure of a total body irradiation-based conditioning regimen to prevent disease progression in patients with high disability scores. Blood. 2003;102:2373–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 80.Coles AJ, Cohen JA, Fox EJ, Giovannoni G, Hartung HP, Havrdova E, Schippling S, et al. CARE-MS II and CAMMS03409 Investigators. Alemtuzumab CARE-MS II 5-year follow-up: efficacy and safety findings. Neurology. 2017;89(11):1117–26. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000004354.
- 81.Havrdova E, Arnold DL, Cohen JA, Hartung HP, Fox EJ, Giovannoni G, Schippling S, et al. CARE-MS I and CAMMS03409 investigators. Alemtuzumab CARE-MS I 5-year follow-up: durable efficacy in the absence of continuous MS therapy. Neurology. 2017;89(11):1107-16. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000004313.
- 83.Giovannoni G, Soelberg Sorensen P, Cook S, Rammohan K, Rieckmann P, Comi G, et al. Safety and efficacy of cladribine tablets in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: results from the randomized extension trial of the CLARITY study. Mult Scler. 2017;24(12):1594–1604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018