Different Treatment Outcomes of Multiple Sclerosis Patients Receiving Ocrelizumab or Ofatumumab

Publikation: Beitrag in FachzeitschriftForschungsartikelBeigetragenBegutachtung

Beitragende

  • Sven G Meuth - , Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf (Autor:in)
  • Stephanie Wolff - , Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg GmbH (Autor:in)
  • Anna Mück - , Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg GmbH (Autor:in)
  • Alice Willison - , Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf (Autor:in)
  • Konstanze Kleinschnitz - , Universitätsklinikum Essen (Autor:in)
  • Saskia Räuber - , Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf (Autor:in)
  • Marc Pawlitzki - , Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf (Autor:in)
  • Franz Felix Konen - , Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (MHH) (Autor:in)
  • Thomas Skripuletz - , Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (MHH) (Autor:in)
  • Matthias Grothe - , Universitätsklinikum Greifswald (Autor:in)
  • Tobias Ruck - , Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf (Autor:in)
  • Hagen B Huttner - , Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg GmbH (Autor:in)
  • Christoph Kleinschnitz - , Universitätsklinikum Essen (Autor:in)
  • Tobias Bopp - , Universitätsmedizin Mainz (Autor:in)
  • Refik Pul - , Universitätsklinikum Essen (Autor:in)
  • Bruce A C Cree - , UCSF Weill Institute for Neuroscience (Autor:in)
  • Hans-Peter Hartung - , Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf (Autor:in)
  • Kathrin Möllenhoff - , Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf (Autor:in)
  • Steffen Pfeuffer - , Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg GmbH (Autor:in)

Abstract

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.

Details

OriginalspracheEnglisch
Seiten (von - bis)583-595
Seitenumfang13
FachzeitschriftAnnals of neurology
Jahrgang97
Ausgabenummer3
Frühes Online-Datum25 Nov. 2024
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - März 2025
Peer-Review-StatusJa
Extern publiziertJa

Externe IDs

PubMedCentral PMC11831887
Scopus 85210040362

Schlagworte

Schlagwörter

  • Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use, Cohort Studies, Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use, Multiple Sclerosis/drug therapy, Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting/drug therapy, Prospective Studies, Treatment Outcome