Is It Time for Ocrelizumab Extended Interval Dosing in Relapsing Remitting MS? Evidence from An Italian Multicenter Experience During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Clinical and radiological activity after extended interval and standard interval dosing of ocrelizumab in multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ocrelizumab is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that is highly effective in reducing MS clinical and radiological activity. The standard dosing regimen consists of infusing 600 mg of ocrelizumab every six months. However, concerns about increasing risks of infection and lowered vaccine response, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, prompted clinicians to extend the dosing interval between ocrelizumab infusions for some patients. Several observational studies have compared the effects of extended-interval dosing (EID) and standardinterval dosing (SID) of ocrelizumab on MS relapse rate and MRI activity.  METHOD: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature to summarize studies comparing ocrelizumab EID and SID on MS disease activity in patients with MS. Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar on the 1st of June 2024.

RESULTS

Our systematic search revealed 348 records, and after deleting duplicates, 29 records remained. Twenty-eight full texts were evaluated; ultimately, 16 studies remained for systematic review. In this meta-analysis, extended interval dosing (EID) was defined variably across studies, with some considering even a one-month delay as EID. The pooled odds ratios (ORs) for clinical and MRI activity, comparing ocrelizumab EID to SID groups, were estimated as 1.04 (95%CI: 0.67-1.6, I2=30%, P=0.21) and 1.31(95%CI: 0.90-1.92) (I2=15%, P=0.32), respectively.  CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that ocrelizumab EID is not associated with greater odds of clinical and radiological disease activity in patients with MS.

Extended-interval dosing of rituximab/ocrelizumab is associated with a reduced decrease in IgG levels in multiple sclerosis

The potential benefits of extended-interval dosing (EID) of rituximab (RTX) or ocrelizumab (OCR) in mitigating the reduction of immunoglobulin levels and decreasing the risk of infection in persons with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (pwRRMS) remain largely unknown. We retrospectively analyzed two structured data collections including pwRRMS who were prescribed RTX/OCR using different interval dosing regimens, a 6-month standard-interval dosing (SD) or EID. The SD and EID cohorts included 88 and 271 pwRRMS, respectively, with a mean (SD) treatment duration of 3.5 (1.3) and 4.4 (1.5) years, and a mean (SD) interval between infusions of 6.4 (1.7) and 19.2 (11.9) months. After RTX/OCR initiation, the two cohorts did not differ in time to first relapse (p ​= ​0.83), time to first sustained accumulation of disability (p ​= ​0.98) and incidence of MRI activity (p ​= ​0.91). The time to first severe infectious event (SIE) was shorter in the SD cohort (p ​= ​0.005). The effect of treatment duration on reduction of serum IgG level was lower in the EID cohort (Estimate ​= ​0.15 ​g/L per year of follow-up, 95 ​% CI -0.06, -0.23, p ​= ​0.001). In the entire patient group, higher serum IgG levels at the last infusion were associated with a lower risk of SIE between two visits (HR ​= ​0.77 per g/L of serum IgG; 95 ​% CI: 0.66-0.91; p ​= ​0.006). This study suggests that EID of RTX/OCR may reduce the risk of serum IgG decline in pwRRMS without a loss of efficacy and may mitigate the risk of severe infections. These results must be confirmed by future randomized studies.

Comparing the efficacy and safety of extended vs standard dosing of ocrelizumab in MS: A systemic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a challenging autoimmune disease that disrupts the central nervous system, leading to a range of symptoms. Ocrelizumab, a treatment commonly used for MS, targets B cells to help manage the disease. While the standard-interval dosing (SID) is effective, the COVID-19 pandemic raised concerns about safety, particularly around immune responses. This prompted interest in extended-interval dosing (EID), which spaces out treatments more. Our study aims to compare how well EID works against SID and if it's safer for patients.

METHODS

We followed strict guidelines to review the research on EID and SID in MS patients. Using databases like PubMed and Scopus, we looked for studies up to July 2024. We included clinical trials and cohort studies that directly compared these dosing strategies. A team of reviewers collected data, assessed the quality of the studies, and performed statistical analysis to find any differences in effectiveness and safety.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 11 studies involving over 2,500 patients. We found that EID and SID were similarly effective in controlling disease activity (no significant difference in NEDA). However, patients on EID experienced fewer side effects, with significantly fewer adverse events compared to those on SID.

CONCLUSION

EID appears to be just as effective as SID in managing MS, but with the added benefit of reducing side effects. This makes EID a promising alternative for long-term treatment, offering patients a lighter treatment burden while maintaining disease control. More research is needed to explore its long-term impact.

Hypogammaglobulinemia and severe infections in Multiple Sclerosis patients on anti-CD20 agents: A multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Hypogammaglobulinemia (HG) is a known side effect of treatment with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, and it is associated with the risk of infections.

OBJECTIVES

Aim of this retrospective multicentre study was to assess the frequency of HG in Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder patients treated with Ocrelizumab or Rituximab and its association with the occurrence of severe infections (SI). Furthermore, predictors of HG and SI were sought.

METHODS

We included 556 patients (190M, 366F, mean age: 47 years) with a mean follow-up of 28 months (range 12-90 months).

RESULTS

IgG HG occurred in 20% and IgM HG in 34% of patients. At multivariable analysis, the risk of IgG HG was influenced by an older age (≥50 years) (OR 1.64, 95%CI: 1.06-2.54, p=0.027), and by the number of treatment cycles (OR: 1.20, 95%CI: 1.09-1.33, p<0.001). A total of 25 SI occurred (100 person-years rate: 1.8), with a disease phenotype other than relapsing-remitting (OR 1.50, 95%CI: 1.02-2.20; p=0.039) and IgG HG (OR 2.65, 95%CI: 1.15-6.12; p=0.022) increasing its risk.

CONCLUSIONS

IgG and IgM HG occurred in a considerable proportion of patients. IgG HG increased the risk of SI, which were, nevertheless, relatively infrequent. Our results highlight the importance of monitoring immunoglobulin levels during treatment with anti-CD20 agents, to personalize treatment strategies.

Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in multiple sclerosis: Rethinking the current treatment strategy

Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies are highly-effective B-cell-depleting therapies in multiple sclerosis (MS). These treatments have expanded the arsenal of highly effective disease-modifying therapies, and have changed the landscape in understanding the pathophysiology of MS and the natural course of the disease. Nevertheless, these treatments come at the cost of immunosuppression and risk of serious infections, diminished vaccination response and treatment-related secondary hypogammaglobulinemia. However, the COVID pandemic has given way to a possibility of readapting these therapies, with most notably extended dosing intervals. While these new strategies show efficacy in maintaining inflammatory MS disease control, and although it is tempting to speculate that tailoring CD20 therapies will reduce the negative outcomes of long-term immunosuppression, it is unknown whether they provide meaningful benefit in reducing the risk of treatment-related secondary hypogammaglobulinemia and serious infections. This review highlights the available anti-CD20 therapies that are available for treating MS patients, and sheds light on encouraging data, which propose that tailoring anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies is the next step in rethinking the current treatment strategy.

The recurrence of disease activity after ocrelizumab discontinuation in multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

Ocrelizumab (OCR) is a highly effective treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS), and B cell repopulation profiles suggest that it might be used as an immune reconstitution therapy. However, data on disease recurrence after stopping treatment with OCR are scarce. Our objective was to evaluate the recurrence of disease activity after OCR discontinuation.

METHODS

In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, we included MS patients who discontinued OCR, without switching to another treatment, for twelve months or more, after having received at least one full dosage of 600 mg. We defined focal inflammation as the occurrence of a clinical relapse or significant MRI activity (≥3 new T2 lesions or ≥2 contrast-enhancing lesions).

RESULTS

We included 53 MS patients; 41 relapsing remitting (RRMS), 5 secondary progressive (SPMS) and 7 primary progressive (PPMS) patients. Median follow-up period after OCR discontinuation was 16 months. We only observed focal inflammation after discontinuation in RRMS patients; 2.4 % (1/41) patients presented with significant MRI activity and matching clinical symptoms, and 7.3 % (3/41) patients presented with a suspected clinical relapse without radiological activity: a total of 9.8 % (4/41) at a median time of 17 months after the last infusion.

DISCUSSION

We found focal inflammation after discontinuation of OCR in 4 (9.8 %) of the RRMS patients, of which 1 was radiologically confirmed. Our observations highlight that recurrence of focal inflammation seems low but discontinuation may not be appropriate for everyone. Further larger studies are important to determine the immune reconstitution therapy potential of OCR.

A multi-centre longitudinal study analysing multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapy prescribing patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic raised concern amongst clinicians that disease-modifying therapies (DMT), particularly anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAb) and fingolimod, could worsen COVID-19 in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). This study aimed to examine DMT prescribing trends pre- and post-pandemic onset.

METHODS

A multi-centre longitudinal study with 8,771 participants from MSBase was conducted. Two time periods were defined: pre-pandemic (March 11 2018-March 10 2020) and post-pandemic onset (March 11 2020-11 March 2022). The association between time and prescribing trends was analysed using multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression. DMT initiation refers to first initiation of any DMT, whilst DMT switches indicate changing regimen within 6 months of last use.

RESULTS

Post-pandemic onset, there was a significant increase in DMT initiation/switching to natalizumab and cladribine [(Natalizumab-initiation: OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.39-2.13; switching: OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.40-1.98), (Cladribine-initiation: OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.09-1.87; switching: OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.41-1.98)]. Anti-CD20mAb initiation/switching decreased in the year of the pandemic, but recovered in the second year, such that overall odds increased slightly post-pandemic (initiation: OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.06-1.49; Switching: OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02-1.29. Initiation/switching of fingolimod, interferon-beta, and alemtuzumab significantly decreased [(Fingolimod-initiation: OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.73; switching: OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.41-0.58), (Interferon-gamma-initiation: OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.41-0.57; switching: OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62-0.99), (Alemtuzumab-initiation: OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.15-0.48; switching: OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.17-0.44)].

CONCLUSIONS

Post-pandemic onset, clinicians preferentially prescribed natalizumab and cladribine over anti-CD20 mAbs and fingolimod, likely to preserve efficacy but reduce perceived immunosuppressive risks. This could have implications for disease progression in pwMS. Our findings highlight the significance of equitable DMT access globally, and the importance of evidence-based decision-making in global health challenges.

COVID-19 and multiple sclerosis: challenges and lessons for patient care

During the COVID-19 pandemic, people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and their healthcare providers have faced unique challenges related to the interaction between SARS-CoV-2, underlying neurological disease and the use of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs). Key concerns arose, primarily related to the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 infection could trigger the initial demyelinating event or exacerbate disease activity. Another major concern was the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines, especially for patients undergoing specific treatments that could weaken their antibody responses. In the post-infection phase, identifying long COVID in patients with MS has been complicated due to the large overlap between post-infection sequelae and MS symptoms. In addition, disruptions in health and rehabilitation services have made it difficult for MS patients to access care. This Series article explores current evidence on the interaction between MS and SARS-CoV-2, identifies the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic in the care of patients with MS, and discusses the significant adoption of digital health solutions, including telemedicine and new technology-based rehabilitation approaches. Based on lessons learned, recommendations and future directions are offered for managing patients with MS, rethinking healthcare systems and improving health outcomes in the post-COVID-19 pandemic era.

Ocrelizumab use in multiple sclerosis: a real-world experience in a changing therapeutic scenario

INTRODUCTION

CD20-depleting therapies are a real milestone in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). This study examined the ocrelizumab (OCR) use in patients with primary progressive (PP) and relapsing remitting (RR) MS, also evaluating the predictors of treatment response.

METHODS

Patients with MS treated with OCR between 2017 and 2022 were included, and OCR use trends examined. The patients' characteristics were assessed at baseline and after 24 months of OCR to assess the NEDA-3 status.

RESULTS

This study included 421 patients: 33 (7.9%) with PP and 388 (92.1%) with RR MS. Among these, 67 (17.3%) were naïve, while switchers from first- and second-line disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) were 199 (51.3%) and 122 (31.4%), respectively. An increasing trend in OCR use was reported. For six patients treated with rituximab, OCR was chosen to improve tolerability; for 390 switcher patients, the choice was due to ineffectiveness; and for 25, as an exit strategy from natalizumab due to JC virus positivity. NEDA-3 status was calculated for subjects exposed to 24 months of OCR and was achieved by 163/192 (84.9%) RR patients and 9/16 (56%) PP patients, with younger age (p = 0.048) and annualized relapse rate in the year previous to OCR (p = 0.005) emerging as determinants. For the 25 patients who switched to OCR after natalizumab, no clinical or MRI activity after 12 months was reported.

CONCLUSION

OCR has been confirmed to be a highly efficacious option for patients with PP and RR MS, even proving to be a valid exit strategy for natalizumab.

Planned dose reduction of ocrelizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a single-centre observational study

Background

Ocrelizumab, a humanised anti-CD20 monoclonal, is a highly effective treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). The long-term safety of B-cell depletion in RRMS, however, is uncertain and there are no data on dose reduction of ocrelizumab as a risk mitigation strategy. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of reducing ocrelizumab dose from 600 to 300 mg in patients with RRMS.

Method

Data were collected through the Townsville neurology service. Following the standard randomised controlled trial regimen of 600 mg every 6 months for 2 years, sequential patients consented to dose reduction to 300 mg every 6 months. Patients were included if they were diagnosed with RRMS and received at least one reduced dose of ocrelizumab. Relapse, disability progression, new MRI lesions, CD19+ cell counts and immunoglobulin concentrations were analysed.

Results

A total of 35 patients, treated with 177 full and 107 reduced doses, were included. The mean follow-up on reduced dose was 17 (1-31) months. We observed no relapses or new MRI activity in the cohort receiving the reduced dose, accompanied by persistent CD19+B cell depletion (≤0.05×109/L). Mean IgG, IgA and IgM levels remained stable throughout the study. No new safety concerns arose.

Conclusions

In this single-centre observational study, dose reduction of ocrelizumab from 600 to 300 mg every 6 months after 2 years appeared to maintain efficacy in terms of new inflammatory disease activity. A randomised trial may be warranted to confirm this and explore the impact of dose reduction on long-term safety.

Extended interval dosing with ocrelizumab in multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

This study investigates clinical and biomarker differences between standard interval dosing (SID) and extended interval dosing (EID) of ocrelizumab therapy in multiple sclerosis (MS).

METHODS

This is a prospective, double-arm, open-label, multi-center study in Denmark. Participants diagnosed with MS on ocrelizumab therapy >12 months were included (n = 184). Clinical, radiological, and blood-based biomarker outcomes were evaluated. MRI disease activity, relapses, worsening of neurostatus, and No Evidence of Disease Activity-3 (NEDA-3) were used as a combined endpoint.

RESULTS

Out of 184 participants, 107 participants received EID (58.2%), whereas 77 participants received SID (41.8%). The average extension was 9 weeks with a maximum of 78 weeks. When comparing EID to SID, we found higher levels of B-cells, lower serum concentrations of ocrelizumab, and similar levels of age-adjusted NFL and GFAP in the two groups. No difference in NEDA-3 between EID and SID was demonstrated (hazard ratio: 1.174, p = 0.69). Higher levels of NFL were identified in participants with disease activity. Body mass index correlated with levels of ocrelizumab and B-cells.

CONCLUSION

Extending one treatment interval of ocrelizumab on average 9 weeks and up to 78 weeks did not result in clinical, radiological, or biomarker evidence of worsening compared with SID.

Memory B cell-guided extended interval dosing of ocrelizumab in multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Ocrelizumab (OCR) is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of relapsing-remitting and primary-progressive multiple sclerosis (MS). We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an individualized OCR extended interval dosing (EID), after switching from standard interval dosing (SID).

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational, single-centre study including MS patients regularly followed at the Neurocenter of Southern Switzerland. After a cumulative OCR dose ⩾1200 mg, stable patients were switched to EID (OCR infusions following CD19+ 27+ memory B cell repopulation).

RESULTS

A total of 128 patients were included in the study, and 113 (88.3%) were switched to EID with a median interval of 9.9 (8.8-11.8) months between infusions. No clinical relapses occurred; 2 (1.8%) patients experienced disability worsening. Three (2.7%) and 2 (1.8%) patients experienced new T2 brain and spinal lesions, respectively. There was a mild decrease in IgG and IgM concentrations during both SID and EID OCR regimens (β = -0.23, p = 0.001 and β = -0.07, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Switch to personalized dosing of OCR based on CD19+ 27+ memory B cell repopulation led to a great extension of the interval between infusions, with maintained clinical and radiological efficacy. Given the potential advantages in terms of safety and health costs, EID OCR regimens should be further investigated.

Clinical and Immunological Impact of Ocrelizumab Extended Interval Dosing in Multiple Sclerosis: A Single-Center, Real-World Experience

Ocrelizumab (OCR), an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, is approved for treating relapsing remitting (RR) and primary progressive (PP) multiple sclerosis (MS). The standard interval dosing (SID) regimen requires intravenous infusions every six months. Experience of extended dosing due to COVID-19 pandemic-related issues suggests that this strategy may provide comparable efficacy while reducing treatment burden and healthcare costs. This study aimed to evaluate clinical effectiveness, changes in B- and T-cell count, and immunoglobulin dynamics associated with extended interval dosing (EID) of ocrelizumab in a real-world setting. We retrospectively included RRMS or PPMS patients treated with OCR that had already received two OCR cycles and with at least 6 months of follow up after the last infusion. EID was defined as a ≥4 weeks delay compared to SID. Clinical outcomes were occurrence of relapses, MRI activity, 6-months confirmed disability progression (CDP) and their combination (No Evidence of Disease Activity, NEDA-3). We also evaluated changes in CD19+ B cell count, CD4+ and CD8+ T cell count, immunoglobulin titers, and occurrence of hypogammaglobulinemia (hypo-Ig). Frequency tests, multivariate regression models, and survival analysis were applied as appropriate. We analyzed data on 93 subjects (75.3% RRMS) for a total of 389 infusions (272 SID, 117 EID). Clinical and MRI activity, CDP, and NEDA 3 did not significantly differ between EID and SID. EID was associated with lower rates of B-cell depletion. T-cell dynamics and incidence of hypo-Ig were comparable following EID and SID. Hypo-IgG at index infusion was associated with further occurrence of hypo-IgG; male sex and hypo-IgM at index infusion were independently associated with hypo-IgM. In conclusion, OCR EID does not impact MS clinical and radiological outcomes, although it interferes with B-cell dynamics. These findings provide support for a tailored schedule of OCR in MS.

Alterations in the innate and adaptive immune system in a real-world cohort of multiple sclerosis patients treated with ocrelizumab

B cell depletion by the anti-CD20 antibody ocrelizumab is effective in relapsing-remitting (RR) and primary progressive (PP) multiple sclerosis (MS). We investigated immunological changes in peripheral blood of a real-world MS cohort after 6 and 12 months of ocrelizumab. All RRMS and most PPMS patients (15/20) showed treatment response. Ocrelizumab not only reduced CD20+ B cells, but also numbers of CD20+ T cells. Absolute numbers of monocytes, dendritic cells and CD8+ T cells were increased, while CD56hi natural killer cells were reduced after ocrelizumab. The residual B cell population shifted towards transitional and activated, IgA+ switched memory B cells, double negative B cells, and antibody-secreting cells. Delaying the treatment interval by 2-3 months increased mean B cell frequencies and enhanced naive B cell repopulation. Ocrelizumab reduced plasma levels of interleukin(IL)-12p70 and interferon(IFN)-α2. These findings will contribute to understanding ineffective treatment responses, dealing with life-threatening infections and further unravelling MS pathogenesis.

COVID-19 outbreak in Italy: an opportunity to evaluate extended interval dosing of ocrelizumab in MS patients

INTRODUCTION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, ocrelizumab (OCR) infusions for MS patients were often re-scheduled because of MS center's disruption and concerns regarding immunosuppression. The aim of the present study was to assess changes in OCR schedule during the first wave of pandemic in Italy and to evaluate the effect of delayed infusion on clinical/radiological endpoints.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Italian MS Register database. Standard interval dosing was defined as an infusion interval ≤ 30 weeks, while extended interval dosing was defined as an infusion interval > 30 weeks at the time of the observation period. Clinico-demographics variables were tested as potential predictors for treatment delay. Time to first relapse and time to first MRI event were evaluated. Cumulative hazard curves were reported along their 95% confidence intervals. A final sample of one-thousand two patients with MS from 65 centers was included in the analysis: 599 pwMS were selected to evaluate the modification of OCR infusion intervals, while 717 pwRMS were selected to analyze the effect of infusion delay on clinical/MRI activity.

RESULTS

Mean interval between two OCR infusions was 28.1 weeks before pandemic compared to 30.8 weeks during the observation period, with a mean delay of 2.74 weeks (p < 0.001). No clinico-demographic factors emerged as predictors of infusion postponement, except for location of MS centers in the North of Italy. Clinical relapses (4 in SID, 0 in EID) and 17 MRI activity reports (4 in SID, 13 in EID) were recorded during follow-up period.

DISCUSSION

Despite the significant extension of OCR infusion interval during the first wave of pandemic in Italy, a very small incidence of clinical/radiological events was observed, thus suggesting durable efficacy of OCR, as well as the absence of rebound after its short-term suspension.

Era of COVID-19 in Multiple Sclerosis Care

The unprecedented scope of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in numerous disruptions to daily life, including for people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). This article reviews how disruptions in multiple sclerosis (MS) care prompted innovations in delivery of care (eg, via telemedicine) and mobilized the global MS community to rapidly adopt safe and effective practices. We discuss how our understanding of the risks of COVID-19 in PwMS has evolved along with recommendations pertaining to disease-modifying therapies and vaccines. With lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic, we examine potential questions for future research in this new era of MS care.

Ocrelizumab Extended Interval Dosing in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: An Italian Experience

BACKGROUND

The intervals between two courses of anti CD20 therapies in the COVID19 pandemic era provided the opportunity to individually delay therapy, known as extended interval dosing (EID).

METHODS

We collect real-world data on patients with primary progressive MS (PPMS) treated with Ocrelizumab (OCR) during the COVID'19 pandemic. The observation period in which the standard interval dosing (SID) or EID occurred (always a maintenance cycle, 600 mg) was from January 2020 to June 2021. All patients had two infusions during the observation period. Our first aim was to compare confirmed disability progression (CDP) between SID and EID patients.

RESULTS

From a total cohort of 410 patients treated with OCR, 96 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All patients received two infusions during the index window, 71 received only SID infusions whilst 25 received at least one EID infusion throughout the entire follow-up. During the entire available follow-up (median 10 months, IQR 7-11), CDP was recorded in 5 patients (3/71, 4.2% SID and 2/25, 8% EID, V-Cramer = 0.141, p-value = 0.167). EID regimen did not influence the risk of CDP during the investigated follow up.

CONCLUSION

In our multicentre real-world cohort, the EID regimen in PPMS patients did not result in increased CDP during the available follow-up.

Ocrelizumab B-cell repopulation-guided extended interval dosing versus standard dosing - similar clinical efficacy with decreased immunoglobulin M deficiency rates

BACKGROUND

Ocrelizumab (OCR) is a humanized anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody used in treatment of multiple sclerosis. The standard dosing (SD) regimen consists of OCR maintenance infusions every 6 months. In B-cell repopulation-guided extended interval dosing (EID), repeat infusions are delayed until there is evidence for B-cell repopulation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare frequencies of 'no evidence of disease activity' (NEDA-3) and immunoglobulin G (hypo-IgG; <600 mg/dL) and M (hypo-IgM; <40 mg/dL) deficiencies in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) treated with OCR B-cell repopulation-guided EID versus SD.

METHODS

Two-center retrospective study comparing frequencies of NEDA-3 and hypo-IgG and hypo-IgM in PwMS treated with OCR B-cell repopulation-guided EID versus SD using a multivariate generalized linear model adjusted for age, sex, and treatment duration.

RESULTS

A total of 112 OCR-treated PwMS were included (B-cell repopulation-guided EID n = 52; SD n = 60) with average infusion intervals of 319 (246-485) days (EID) and 184 (170-218) days (SD). There was no significant difference in NEDA-3 (EID: 47/52 [90.4 %]; SD: 50/60 [83.3 %]; p = 0.161) or hypo-IgG (EID: 1/52 [1.9 %]; SD: 4/60 [6.7 %]; p = 0.298) rates. Hypo-IgM was significantly less common in EID (EID: 9/52 [17.3 %] vs. SD: 34/60 [55 %]; p<0.001) upon assessment 1099 (475-1436) days (EID) and 980 (409-1846) days (SD) post-initiation of OCR. Hypo-IgM was associated with average infusion interval length (p = 0.005) and total number of OCR cycles (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

OCR B-cell repopulation-guided EID may be a safe alternative to traditional SD with similar efficacy and significantly less hypo-IgM rates.

Extended interval dosing of ocrelizumab modifies the repopulation of B cells without altering the clinical efficacy in multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggest that extended interval dosing of ocrelizumab, an anti-B cell therapy, does not affect its clinical effectiveness in most patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). However, it remains to be established whether certain B cell subsets are differentially repopulated after different dosing intervals and whether these subsets relate to clinical efficacy.

METHODS

We performed high-dimensional single-cell characterization of the peripheral immune landscape of patients with MS after standard (SID; n = 43) or extended interval dosing (EID; n = 37) of ocrelizumab and in non-ocrelizumab-treated (control group, CG; n = 28) patients with MS, using mass cytometry by time of flight (CyTOF).

RESULTS

The first B cells that repopulate after both ocrelizumab dosing schemes were immature, transitional and regulatory CD1d+ CD5+ B cells. In addition, we observed a higher percentage of transitional, naïve and regulatory B cells after EID in comparison with SID, but not of memory B cells or plasmablasts. The majority of repopulated B cell subsets showed an increased migratory phenotype, characterized by higher expression of CD49d, CD11a, CD54 and CD162. Interestingly, after EID, repopulated B cells expressed increased CD20 levels compared to B cells in CG and after SID, which was associated with a delayed repopulation of B cells after a subsequent ocrelizumab infusion. Finally, the number of/changes in B cell subsets after both dosing schemes did not correlate with any relapses nor progression of the disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Taken together, our data highlight that extending the dosing interval of ocrelizumab does not lead to increased repopulation of effector B cells. We show that the increase of CD20 expression on B cell subsets in EID might lead to longer depletion or less repopulation of B cells after the next infusion of ocrelizumab. Lastly, even though extending the ocrelizumab interval dosing alters B cell repopulation, it does not affect the clinical efficacy of ocrelizumab in our cohort of patients with MS.

Ocrelizumab extended-interval dosing in multiple sclerosis during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: a real-world experience

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

During the COVID-19 pandemic, ocrelizumab administration was frequently postponed because of a lack of safety information and to favour vaccination. The clinical implications of ocrelizumab administration delay in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients were assessed.

METHODS

Relapsing (RMS) and primary progressive (PPMS) MS patients receiving ocrelizumab for at least 6 months at our centre were retrospectively classified, according to the possible occurrence of a delay (≥4 weeks) in treatment administration. Patients were categorized in the extended-interval dosing (EID) group in the presence of at least one delayed infusion; otherwise they were considered as part of the standard interval dosing (SID) cohort. MS history, magnetic resonance imaging examinations and B-cell counts were also retrospectively collected and analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 213 RMS and 61 PPMS patients were enrolled; 115 RMS and 29 PPMS patients had been treated according to the SID regimen, whilst 98 RMS and 32 PPMS patients were included in the EID cohort. Average follow-up after delay was 1.28 ± 0.7 years in the EID cohort. In RMS, comparing SID and EID patients, no differences were found considering the occurrence of clinical relapses (9.6% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.338), magnetic resonance imaging activity (9.8% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.374) or disability progression (11.3% vs. 18.4%, p = 0.103). Similar findings were observed in PPMS patients. In the pooled EID group, treatment delay correlated with CD19-positive relative (r = 0.530, p < 0.001) and absolute (r = 0.491, p < 0.001) cell counts, without implications on disease activity.

CONCLUSIONS

Sporadic ocrelizumab administration delay granted sustained treatment efficacy in our cohort. Prospective data should be obtained to confirm these observations and set up systematic extended-interval regimens.

Clinical and economic evaluations of natalizumab, rituximab, and ocrelizumab for the management of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Saudi Arabia

INTRODUCTION

The advent of new disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), resulted in significant changes in the treatment guidelines for Multiple sclerosis (MS) and improvement in the clinical outcomes. However, mAbs, such as rituximab, natalizumab, and ocrelizumab, are expensive with variable effectiveness rates. Thus, the present study aimed to compare the direct medical cost and consequences (e.g., clinical relapse, disability progression, and new MRI lesions) between rituximab and natalizumab in managing relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) in Saudi Arabia. Also, the study aimed to explore the cost and consequence of ocrelizumab in managing RRMS as a second-choice treatment.

METHODS

The electronic medical records (EMRs) of patients with RRMS were retrospectively reviewed to retrieve the patients' baseline characteristics and disease progression from two tertiary care centers in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Biologic-naïve patients treated with rituximab or natalizumab or those switched to ocrelizumab and treated for at least six months were included in the study. The effectiveness rate was defined as no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3) (i.e., absence of new T2 or T1 gadolinium (Gd) lesions as demonstrated by the Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), disability progression, and clinical relapses), while the direct medical costs were estimated based on the utilization of healthcare resources. In addition, bootstrapping with 10,000 replications and inverse probability weighting based on propensity score were conducted.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis (natalizumab (n = 50), rituximab (n = 26), ocrelizumab (n = 17)). Most of the patients were otherwise healthy (81.72%), under 35 years of age (76.34%), females (61.29%), and on the same mAb for more than one year (83.87%). The mean effectiveness rates for natalizumab, rituximab, and ocrelizumab were 72.00%, 76.92%, and 58.83%, respectively. Natalizumab mean incremental cost compared to rituximab was $35,383 (95% CI: $25,401.09- $49,717.92), and its mean effectiveness rate was 4.92% lower than rituximab (95% CI: -30-27.5) with 59.41% confidence level that rituximab will be dominant.

CONCLUSIONS

Rituximab seems to be more effective and is less costly than natalizumab in the management of RRMS. Ocrelizumab does not seem to slow the rates of disease progression among patients previously treated with natalizumab.

Involvement of TLR2-TLR4, NLRP3, and IL-17 in pain induced by a novel Sprague-Dawley rat model of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis

Up to 92% of patients suffering from multiple sclerosis (MS) experience pain, most without adequate treatment, and many report pain long before motor symptoms associated with MS diagnosis. In the most commonly studied rodent model of MS, experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), motor impairments/disabilities caused by EAE can interfere with pain testing. In this study, we characterize a novel low-dose myelin-oligodendrocyte-glycoprotein (MOG)-induced Sprague-Dawley (SD) model of EAE-related pain in male rats, optimized to minimize motor impairments/disabilities. Adult male SD rats were treated with increasing doses of intradermal myelin-oligodendrocyte-glycoprotein (MOG1-125) (0, 4, 8, and 16 μg) in incomplete Freund's adjuvant (IFA) vehicle to induce mild EAE. Von Frey testing and motor assessments were conducted prior to EAE induction and then weekly thereafter to assess EAE-induced pain and motor impairment. Results from these studies demonstrated that doses of 8 and 16 μg MOG1-125 were sufficient to produce stable mechanical allodynia for up to 1 month in the absence of hindpaw motor impairments/disabilities. In the follow-up studies, these doses of MOG1-125, were administered to create allodynia in the absence of confounded motor impairments. Then, 2 weeks later, rats began daily subcutaneous injections of the Toll-like receptor 2 and 4 (TLR2-TLR4) antagonist (+)-naltrexone [(+)-NTX] or saline for an additional 13 days. We found that (+)-NTX also reverses EAE-induced mechanical allodynia in the MOG-induced SD rat model of EAE, supporting parallels between models, but now allowing a protracted timecourse to be examined completely free of motor confounds. Exploring further mechanisms, we demonstrated that both spinal NOD-like receptor protein 3 (NLRP3) and interleukin-17 (IL-17) are necessary for EAE-induced pain, as intrathecal injections of NLRP3 antagonist MCC950 and IL-17 neutralizing antibody both acutely reversed EAE-induced pain. Finally, we show that spinal glial immunoreactivity induced by EAE is reversed by (+)-NTX, and that spinal demyelination correlates with the severity of motor impairments/disabilities. These findings characterize an optimized MOG-induced SD rat model of EAE for the study of pain with minimal motor impairments/disabilities. Finally, these studies support the role of TLR2-TLR4 antagonists as a potential treatment for MS-related pain and other pain and inflammatory-related disorders.