Different Treatment Outcomes of Multiple Sclerosis Patients Receiving Ocrelizumab or Ofatumumab

dc.contributor.authorMeuth, Sven G.
dc.contributor.authorWolff, Stephanie
dc.contributor.authorMück, Anna
dc.contributor.authorWillison, Alice
dc.contributor.authorKleinschnitz, Konstanze
dc.contributor.authorRäuber, Saskia
dc.contributor.authorPawlitzki, Marc
dc.contributor.authorKonen, Franz Felix
dc.contributor.authorSkripuletz, Thomas
dc.contributor.authorGrothe, Matthias
dc.contributor.authorRuck, Tobias
dc.contributor.authorHuttner, Hagen B.
dc.contributor.authorKleinschnitz, Christoph
dc.contributor.authorBopp, Tobias
dc.contributor.authorPul, Refik
dc.contributor.authorCree, Bruce A. C.
dc.contributor.authorHartung, Hans-Peter
dc.contributor.authorMöllenhoff, Kathrin
dc.contributor.authorPfeuffer, Steffen
dc.date.accessioned2025-11-14T07:42:44Z
dc.date.available2025-11-14T07:42:44Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.description.abstractObjective: 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.en
dc.identifier.urihttps://jlupub.ub.uni-giessen.de/handle/jlupub/21004
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.22029/jlupub-20353
dc.language.isoen
dc.rightsNamensnennung - Nicht kommerziell - Keine Bearbeitungen 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subject.ddcddc:610
dc.titleDifferent Treatment Outcomes of Multiple Sclerosis Patients Receiving Ocrelizumab or Ofatumumab
dc.typearticle
local.affiliationFB 11 - Medizin
local.source.epage595
local.source.journaltitleAnnals of neurology
local.source.spage583
local.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.1002/ana.27143
local.source.volume97

Dateien

Originalbündel

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 1 von 1
Lade...
Vorschaubild
Name:
10.1002ana.27143.pdf
Größe:
1.4 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format