Simulated treatment comparison of efficacy outcomes for ofatumumab in ASCLEPIOS I/II versus ocrelizumab in OPERA I/II for the treatment of patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis

Different Treatment Outcomes of Multiple Sclerosis Patients Receiving Ocrelizumab or Ofatumumab

OBJECTIVE

B-cell-depletion via CD20 antibodies is a safe and effective treatment for active relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). Both ocrelizumab (OCR) and ofatumumab (OFA) have demonstrated efficacy in randomized controlled trials and are approved for treatment of RMS, yet nothing is known on their comparative effectiveness, especially in the real-world setting.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study includes patients that were started on either OCR or OFA between September 2021 and December 2023. Patients were followed until June 2024 and recruited at 3 large tertiary centers in Germany (Duesseldorf, Essen, and Giessen). Propensity-score-matching was used to address baseline imbalances among patients. Clinical relapses, presence of new or enlarging MRI lesions and 6-month confirmed disability worsening were evaluated. Non-inferiority of OFA compared to OCR was evaluated through comparison of Kaplan-Meier-estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 1,138 patients were initially enrolled in the cohort. Following patient selection and propensity-score-matching, 544 OCR and 417 OFA patients were included in the final analysis. In our primary analysis, OFA was non-inferior to OCR in terms of relapses, disability progression, and accrual of MRI lesions. Subgroup analyses confirmed findings in previously naïve and platform-treated patients. Potential differences between OFA and OCR were seen in patients switching from S1P receptor modulators or natalizumab.

CONCLUSION

We here provide comparative data on the effectiveness of OCR and OFA in patients with active RMS. OFA was non-inferior to OCR in the overall cohort. Potential differences observed in patients switching from S1P receptor modulators or natalizumab require further validation. ANN NEUROL 2025;97:583-595.

In multiple sclerosis patients a single serum neurofilament light chain (sNFL) dosage is strongly associated with 12 months outcome: data from a real-life clinical setting

BACKGROUND

Neurofilament light chain (NFL) is a neuroaxonal cytoskeletal protein released into cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and eventually into blood upon neuronal injury. Its detection in serum (sNFL) makes it a promising marker in multiple sclerosis (MS).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the usefulness of a single dosage of sNFL in clinical practice.

METHODS

626 consecutive relapsing-remitting (RR) MS patients treated with disease modifying treatments (DMTs) for at least 12 months underwent a single sNFL dosage. 553 patients had NEDA-3 status (no relapses, no disability progression, no new/enlarging or contrast-enhancing lesions on brain magnetic resonance imaging) in the 12 months prior blood sampling. sNFL levels were measured by single molecule array (Simoa™). Association between sNFL levels and NEDA-3 status at 12, 24, and 36 months was evaluated with logistic regression models adjusted for sex, EDSS, disease duration, and type of DMTs.

RESULTS

469 out of the 553 NEDA-3 patients had normal sNFL level, whereas 42 had elevated level. The two groups did not differ regarding baseline characteristics. A very strong association between elevated sNFL levels and loss of NEDA-3 status within 12 months was found, with an odds ratio [OR] of 10.74 (95% CI 4.34-26.57); 15 and 10 patients with normal and elevated sNFL, respectively lost NEDA-3 (p < 0.001). The effect was not detected during the subsequent 13-24 and 25-36 months.

CONCLUSIONS

A single elevated sNFL is strongly associated with NEDA-3 loss within 1 year. Elevated sNFL in apparently stable patients suggests an ongoing disease activity below the detection threshold of standard parameters.

Combining gene expression microarrays and Mendelian randomization: exploring key immune-related genes in multiple sclerosis

Objective

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by demyelination occurring within the white matter of the central nervous system. While its pathogenesis is intricately linked with the body's immune response, the precise underlying mechanisms remain elusive. This study aims to explore potential immune-related genes associated with MS and assess the causal relationship between these genes and the risk of developing MS.

Methods

We retrieved expression datasets of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from MS patients from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. Immune-related differentially expressed genes (IM-DEGs) were identified using the ImmPort database. GO and KEGG analyses were subsequently performed to elucidate the functions and pathways associated with the IM-DEGs. To visualize protein-protein interactions (PPIs), we used STRING, Cytoscape, and Cytohubba to construct networks of PPIs and hub genes. The diagnostic efficacy of hub genes was assessed using the nomogram model and ROC curve. The correlation of these hub genes was further validated in the mouse EAE model using quantitative PCR (qPCR). Finally, Mendelian randomization (MR) was performed to ascertain the causal impact of hub genes on MS.

Results

Twenty-eight IM-DEGs were selected from the intersection of DEGs and immune genes. These genes are involved mainly in antigen receptor-mediated signaling pathways, B cell differentiation, B cell proliferation, and B cell receptor signaling pathways. Using Cytoscape software for analysis, the top 10 genes with the highest scores were identified as PTPRC, CD19, CXCL8, CD79A, IL7, CR2, CD22, BLNK, LCN2, and LTF. Five hub genes (PTPRC, CD19, CXCL8, CD79A, and IL7) are considered to have strong diagnostic potential. In the qPCR validation, the relative expression of these five genes showed significant differences between the control and EAE groups, indicating that these genes may play a potential role in the pathogenesis of MS. The MR results indicate that elevated levels of CD79A (OR = 1.106, 95% CI 1.002-1.222, p = 0.046) are causally positively associated with the risk of developing MS.

Conclusion

This study integrated GEO data mining with MR to pinpoint pivotal immune genes linked to the onset of MS, thereby offering novel strategies for the treatment of MS.

Ocrelizumab and ofatumumab comparison: an Italian real-world propensity score matched study

BACKGROUND

The management of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) has undergone transformative evolution with the introduction of high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), specifically anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, such as ocrelizumab (OCR) and ofatumumab (OFA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is an independent retrospective cohort study in Relapsing MS (RMS) patients followed at eight Italian MS centers who initiated treatment with OCR or OFA in the participating centers and with at least 12 months on therapy. A generalized linear regression model inverse probability of treatment weight (IPTW) PS-adjusted was performed to evaluate the relationship between annualized relapse rate (ARR) and treatment groups. No evidence of disease activity-NEDA-3 at 12-month score was also collected. Safety profile of the investigated DMTs was recorded.

RESULTS

A total cohort of 396 RMS patients fulfilled the required criteria and were enrolled in the study. Out of them, 216 had a prescription of OCR and 180 of OFA. The mean follow-up was 13.2 ± 1.9 months. The estimated means for ARR did not show differences between the two groups, 0.059 for patients on OCR and 0.038 for patients on OFA (p = 0.185). The generalized regression model IPTW PS-adjusted did not reveal differences between patients on OCR and OFA (ExpBOFA 0.974, 95%CI 934-1.015, p = 0.207). NEDA-3 at 12 months was experienced by 199(92.1%) patients on OCR and 170(94.4%) patients on OFA (p = 0.368). Generally, both therapies exhibit good tolerability.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment with OCR and OFA resulted in comparable control of disease activity with good safety profile. Our results need further validation in larger multicentre studies with long-term follow-up.

Race and ethnicity in multiple sclerosis phase 3 clinical trials: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Distinctive differences in multiple sclerosis (MS) have been observed by race and ethnicity. We aim to (1) assess how often race and ethnicity were reported in clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, (2) evaluate whether the population was diverse enough, and (3) compare with publications.

METHODS

We included phase 3 clinical trials registered with results on ClinicalTrials.gov between 2007 and 2023. When race and/or ethnicity were reported, we searched for the corresponding publications.

RESULTS

Out of the 99 included studies, 56% reported race and/or ethnicity, of which only 26% of those primarily completed before 2017. Studies reporting race or ethnicity contributed to a total of 33,891 participants, mainly enrolled in Eastern Europe. Most were White (93%), and the median percentage of White participants was 93% (interquartile range (IQR) = 86%-98%), compared to 3% for Black (IQR = 1%-12%) and 0.2% for Asian (IQR = 0%-1%). Four trials omitted race and ethnicity in publications and even when information was reported, some discrepancies in terminology were identified and categories with fewer participants were often collapsed.

CONCLUSION

More efforts should be done to improve transparency, accuracy, and representativeness, in publications and at a design phase, by addressing social determinants of health that historically limit the enrollment of underrepresented population.

Comparative efficacy of ofatumumab versus oral therapies for relapsing multiple sclerosis patients using propensity score analyses and simulated treatment comparisons

Background

Evidence from network meta-analyses (NMAs) and real-world propensity score (PS) analyses suggest monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) offer a therapeutic advantage over currently available oral therapies and, therefore, warrant consideration as a distinct group of high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). This is counter to the current perception of these therapies by some stakeholders, including payers.

Objectives

A multifaceted indirect treatment comparison (ITC) approach was undertaken to clarify the relative efficacy of mAbs and oral therapies.

Design

Two ITC methods that use individual patient data (IPD) to adjust for between-trial differences, PS analyses and simulated treatment comparisons (STCs), were used to compare the mAb ofatumumab versus the oral therapies cladribine, fingolimod, and ozanimod.

Data sources and methods

As IPD were available for trials of ofatumumab and fingolimod, PS analyses were conducted. Given summary-level data were available for cladribine, fingolimod, and ozanimod trials, STCs were conducted between ofatumumab and each of these oral therapies. Three efficacy outcomes were compared: annualized relapse rate (ARR), 3-month confirmed disability progression (3mCDP), and 6-month CDP (6mCDP).

Results

The PS analyses demonstrated ofatumumab was statistically superior to fingolimod for ARR and time to 3mCDP but not time to 6mCDP. In STCs, ofatumumab was statistically superior in reducing ARR and decreasing the proportion of patients with 3mCDP compared with cladribine, fingolimod, and ozanimod and in decreasing the proportion with 6mCP compared with fingolimod and ozanimod. These findings were largely consistent with recently published NMAs that identified mAb therapies as the most efficacious DMTs for RMS.

Conclusion

Complementary ITC methods showed ofatumumab was superior to cladribine, fingolimod, and ozanimod in lowering relapse rates and delaying disability progression among patients with RMS. Our study supports the therapeutic superiority of mAbs over currently available oral DMTs for RMS and the delineation of mAbs as high-efficacy therapies.

Ocrelizumab and ofatumumab, but not rituximab, trigger complement induction in vitro

The clinical and adverse effects of the therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAb) ocrelizumab, ofatumumab and rituximab in multiple sclerosis (MS) are presently subject to extensive study. While the two former are approved for MS, the older and less costly rituximab is used off label, and adverse effect profiles are important in their evaluation. The three mAbs all induce B cell depletion, with complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) as one of several mechanisms of action. Complement activation is also postulated to underlie adverse reactions related to infusion/injection. Such administration-related reactions are associated with all three mAbs, but comparisons have so far been indirect, resting on incidence reports from separate clinical trials. The objective of this study was to perform head-to-head comparison of complement activation by ofatumumab, ocrelizumab and rituximab. In vitro experiments were performed in whole blood from healthy donors. The complement-activating potential of the three mAbs was analyzed after 30 min of exposure to 0.3 mg/mL or 0.9 mg/mL of each drug, and compared with those of the well-known TNF inhibitory mAbs adalimumab and infliximab, the latter with recognized potential for infusion reactions. Ofatumumab, ocrelizumab, and infliximab, but not rituximab and adalimumab, triggered statistically significant complement activation measured as increased levels of terminal C5b-9 complement complex (TCC), a sensitive marker of such activation. While results demand careful interpretation, they provide an indication of distinct complement-inducing potential among anti-CD20 mAbs currently used to treat MS.

The Development of Ofatumumab, a Fully Human Anti-CD20 Monoclonal Antibody for Practical Use in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis Treatment

The importance of B cells in multiple sclerosis (MS) has been demonstrated through the advent of B-cell-depleting anti-CD20 antibody therapies. Ofatumumab is the first fully human anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (mAb) developed and tested for subcutaneous (SC) self-administration at monthly doses of 20 mg, and has been approved in the US, UK, EU, and other regions and countries worldwide for the treatment of relapsing MS. The development goal of ofatumumab was to obtain a highly efficacious anti-CD20 therapy, with a safety and tolerability profile that allows for self-administration by MS patients at home and a positive benefit-risk balance for use in the broad relapsing MS population. This development goal was enabled by the unique binding site, higher affinity to B cells, and higher potency of ofatumumab compared to previous anti-CD20 mAbs; these properties of ofatumumab facilitate rapid B-cell depletion and maintenance with a low dose at a low injection volume (20 mg/0.4 ml). The high potency in turn enables the selective targeting of B cells that reside in the lymphatic system via subcutaneous (SC) administration. Through a comprehensive dose-finding program in two phase 2 studies (one intravenous and one SC) and model simulations, it was found that safety and tolerability can be further improved, and the risk of systemic injection-related reactions (IRRs) minimized, by avoiding doses ≥ 30 mg, and by reaching initial and rapid B-cell depletion via stepwise weekly administration of ofatumumab at Weeks 0, 1, and 2 (instead of a single high dose). Once near-complete B-cell depletion is reached, it can be maintained by monthly doses of 20 mg/0.4 ml. Indeed, in phase 3 trials (ASCLEPIOS I/II), rapid and sustained near-complete B-cell depletion (largely independent of body weight, race and other factors) was observed with this dosing regimen, which resulted in superior efficacy of ofatumumab versus teriflunomide on relapse rates, disability worsening, neuronal injury (serum neurofilament light chain), and imaging outcomes. Likely due to its fully human nature, ofatumumab has a low immunogenic risk profile-only 2 of 914 patients receiving ofatumumab in ASCLEPIOS I/II developed anti-drug antibodies-and this may also underlie the infrequent IRRs (20% with ofatumumab vs. 15% with the placebo injection in the teriflunomide arm) that were mostly (99.8%) mild to moderate in severity. The overall rates of infections and serious infections in patients treated with ofatumumab were similar to those in patients treated with teriflunomide (51.6% vs. 52.7% and 2.5% vs. 1.8%, respectively). The benefit-risk profile of ofatumumab was favorable compared to teriflunomide in the broad RMS population, and also in the predefined subgroups of both recently diagnosed and/or treatment-naïve patients, as well as previously disease-modifying therapy-treated patients. Interim data from the ongoing extension study (ALITHIOS) have shown that long-term treatment with ofatumumab up to 4 years is well-tolerated in RMS patients, with no new safety risks identified. In parallel to the phase 3 trials in which SC administration was carried out with a pre-filled syringe, an autoinjector pen for more convenient self-administration of the ofatumumab 20 mg dose was developed and is available for use in clinical practice.

Health-economic benefits of anti-CD20 treatments in relapsing multiple sclerosis estimated using a treatment-sequence model

Background

In high-income countries, four anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are used or in the pipeline for relapsing MS: ocrelizumab, ofatumumab (both registered), ublituximab (awaiting registration) and rituximab (off-label). List prices differ significantly between registered and off-label drugs.

Objective

Comparing differences in benefits between anti-CD20 mAbs from a health-economic and societal perspective.

Methods

To reflect lifetime use of DMTs, we used a treatment-sequence model to compare ocrelizumab/ofatumumab and eight other drug classes in terms of health (lifetime relapses, time to Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] 6, lifetime quality-adjusted life years) and cost-effectiveness (net health benefit). To become cost-effective compared to ocrelizumab, we modelled the list price of ublituximab and desired effect on EDSS progression of rituximab.

Results

Although drug sequences with ocrelizumab in first- and second-line were more cost-effective than ofatumumab, our probabilistic analysis suggests this outcome was very uncertain. To be more cost-effective than ocrelizumab, ublituximab needs to be about 25% cheaper whilst rituximab needs to equal the effect on disability progression seen with first-line treatments.

Conclusions

Our model showed no clear difference in cost-effectiveness between ocrelizumab and ofatumumab. Hence, prescribing the least costly anti-CD20 mAb can democratise MS care without a loss in health benefits.

Case Report: Ofatumumab treatment in a patient with rituximab-intolerant refractory autoimmune GFAP astrocytopathy

BACKGROUND

Ofatumumab, a fully humanized anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, has shown promising efficacy in limited cases of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder, but there is a lack of studies on its use in autoimmune glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) astrocytopathy. We present a case of refractory GFAP astrocytopathy with poor response to conventional immunosuppressants and rituximab who responded well to subcutaneous ofatumumab.

CASE REPORT

The patient is a 36-year-old woman with a diagnosis of GFAP astrocytopathy and high disease activity. She experienced five relapses over three years despite immunosuppressive treatment with oral prednisone, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and intravenous rituximab. Additionally, her circulating B cells were not completely depleted during the second administration of rituximab and an allergic reaction occurred. Based on insufficient B cell depletion and allergic reaction to rituximab, subcutaneous ofatumumab was introduced. After twelve injections of ofatumumab without injection-related reactions, she had no further relapses and was sufficiently depleted of the circulating B cells.

DISCUSSION

This case illustrates the effective use and good tolerance of ofatumumab in GFAP astrocytopathy. Further studies are needed to investigate the efficacy and safety of ofatumumab in refractory GFAP astrocytopathy or those intolerant to rituximab.

What Do We Know So Far about Ofatumumab for Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis? A Meta-Analytical Study

Ofatumumab is a monoclonal antibody that reduces the level of B cells that alter the progression of relapsing multiple sclerosis. Originally approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in August 2020, this meta-analysis determines the outcomes of four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for endline outcomes of Gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions on MRI scans reported as Cohen’s d and relapse rate reported as risk ratio. All four RCTs reported favorable findings of gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions (Cohen’s d = −0.44, p < 0.00001). The relapse rate was reduced by 46% post ofatumumab administration (RR = 0.54, p < 0.00001). With 14 ongoing trials in this area, more data is required to consolidate our findings.