Multiple sclerosis and related disorders · 2025
Effectiveness of anti-CD20 therapies following natalizumab discontinuation: insights from a cohort study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cunha Carolina, Matos Sara, Bernardes Catarina, Carvalho Inês, Cardoso João, Campelo Isabel, Nunes Carla, Macário Carmo, Sousa Lívia, Batista Sónia, Correia Inês
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Natalizumab (NTZ) is a highly effective multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment but carries a high risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in JCV-positive patients. Switching to other therapies is sometimes necessary despite the risk of increasing disease activity, even with other highly effective treatments, such as anti-CD20 therapies.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate anti-CD20 therapies effectiveness after NTZ discontinuation.
METHODS: A retrospective study including MS patients who switched NTZ to anti-CD20 therapies: rituximab (RTX), ocrelizumab (OCR), and ofatumumab (OFA). Demographic, clinical, and safety data were analyzed.
RESULTS: We included 59 patients (41 female). Mean disease duration at data collection was 7,88 ± 6,62 years. The main reason for NTZ discontinuation was safety concerns related to JCV seroconversion and serum titer increase (n = 52). RTX patients had significantly longer and more active disease before transition. Comparing annualized relapse rate (ARR) and EDSS before and after switch, RTX significantly reduced ARR (0,65 vs 0,08; p = 0007) but led to a significant EDSS increase (3,65 vs 4,15; p = 0022). No significant changes were observed for OCR and OFA. ARR reduction was greater with RTX than OCR and OFA (p = 0018), though EDSS variation did not differ. Survival analysis showed no difference in time to disease activity between groups. In this cohort, 70 % of disability progression was due to progression independent of relapse activity (PIRA).
CONCLUSION: Anti-CD20 therapies appear to be a safe option after NTZ discontinuation, with no rebound disease and stable EDSS. PIRA was the main driver for disability progression, emphasizing the need to control smoldering disease.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate anti-CD20 therapies effectiveness after NTZ discontinuation.
METHODS: A retrospective study including MS patients who switched NTZ to anti-CD20 therapies: rituximab (RTX), ocrelizumab (OCR), and ofatumumab (OFA). Demographic, clinical, and safety data were analyzed.
RESULTS: We included 59 patients (41 female). Mean disease duration at data collection was 7,88 ± 6,62 years. The main reason for NTZ discontinuation was safety concerns related to JCV seroconversion and serum titer increase (n = 52). RTX patients had significantly longer and more active disease before transition. Comparing annualized relapse rate (ARR) and EDSS before and after switch, RTX significantly reduced ARR (0,65 vs 0,08; p = 0007) but led to a significant EDSS increase (3,65 vs 4,15; p = 0022). No significant changes were observed for OCR and OFA. ARR reduction was greater with RTX than OCR and OFA (p = 0018), though EDSS variation did not differ. Survival analysis showed no difference in time to disease activity between groups. In this cohort, 70 % of disability progression was due to progression independent of relapse activity (PIRA).
CONCLUSION: Anti-CD20 therapies appear to be a safe option after NTZ discontinuation, with no rebound disease and stable EDSS. PIRA was the main driver for disability progression, emphasizing the need to control smoldering disease.