Extended interval dosing with ocrelizumab in multiple sclerosis.
Multiple sclerosis
NEDA-3
anti-CD20
biomarkers
extended dosing
neuroimaging
ocrelizumab
personalized medicine
treatment interval
Journal
Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England)
ISSN: 1477-0970
Titre abrégé: Mult Scler
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9509185
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Apr 2024
22 Apr 2024
Historique:
medline:
22
4
2024
pubmed:
22
4
2024
entrez:
22
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
This study investigates clinical and biomarker differences between standard interval dosing (SID) and extended interval dosing (EID) of ocrelizumab therapy in multiple sclerosis (MS). This is a prospective, double-arm, open-label, multi-center study in Denmark. Participants diagnosed with MS on ocrelizumab therapy >12 months were included ( 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, 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.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
UNASSIGNED
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
UNASSIGNED
This is a prospective, double-arm, open-label, multi-center study in Denmark. Participants diagnosed with MS on ocrelizumab therapy >12 months were included (
RESULTS
UNASSIGNED
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,
CONCLUSION
UNASSIGNED
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38646949
doi: 10.1177/13524585241245296
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
13524585241245296Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: H. M. Bajwa, K. Østergaard, J. M. Berg, J. S. Madsen, D. A. Olsen, and I. Urbonaviciute have nothing to disclose. F. Novak served on advisory boards for Sanofi and received travel grants from Sanofi and Merck; Z. Illes has received speakers’ honoraria and/or research grants from Biogen, Roche, Sanofi, Novartis, Merck, and Lundbeckfonden; has been member of advisory boards at Alexion, Biogen, Sanofi, Merck, Roche, and Novartis; was a member of the adjudication relapse committee in phase 3 trials; and has been principal investigator in studies sponsored by Biogen, Merck, and Sanofi; M. L. Stilund reported serving on scientific advisory boards for Sanofi, receiving support for congress participation, or receiving speaker honoraria from Biogen, Teva, Merck, Roche, and Sanofi, grants for his research from Novartis, and being currently engaged in sponsor-initiated research projects by Bayer, Jansen, Shionogi, and Sanofi outside the submitted work; J. R. Christensen has received speaker honoraria from Biogen; S. Bramow received speaking honoraria from Merck Denmark and Novartis Denmark and support for congress participation from Novartis Denmark; F. Sellebjerg has served on scientific advisory boards for, served as consultant for, received support for congress participation, or received speaker honoraria from Alexion, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi Genzyme. His laboratory has received research support from Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi Genzyme; T. Sejbaek received travel grants from Biogen, Merck, Novartis, and Roche and research grants from Biogen and served on advisory boards for Biogen, Merck, and Novartis.