Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35713731›Full record

SynthesisNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2022

Comparative safety of high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Katarzyna Śladowska, Paweł Kawalec, Przemysław Holko, Oktawia Osiecka

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Natalizumab for multiple sclerosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. The relative risk of infection in people with multiple sclerosis using disease-modifying treatment: a systematic review of observational studies.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Managing reactivation of multiple sclerosis during treatment with natalizumab.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2026
    Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Cladribine tablets in the new multiple sclerosis era.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis: from phenomenology to neurobiological mechanisms.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2024
    Review
  19. Headache in Multiple Sclerosis: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katarzyna ŚladowskaDepartment of Nutrition and Drug Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Paweł KawalecDepartment of Nutrition and Drug Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland. pawel.kawalec@uj.edu.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0125-0947
Przemysław HolkoDepartment of Nutrition and Drug Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Public Health, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Oktawia OsieckaDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Biochemistry, Biophysics and Biotechnology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.
Jagiellonian University · PL

Funding

Uniwersytet Jagielloński Collegium Medicum N43/DBS/000099.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to compare the safety profile of high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) natalizumab, fingolimod, alemtuzumab, cladribine, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, ozanimod, as well as a potentially high-efficacy DMT, ponesimod, in adult patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

methodsA systematic review with frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least 48-week follow-up investigating the use of natalizumab, fingolimod, alemtuzumab, cladribine, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, ozanimod, and ponesimod, as well as other DMTs, in adult patients with RRMS. Eligible studies were identified by two reviewers in MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. The Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess the risk of bias for RCTs was used.

resultsA total of 33 RCTs were included in the systematic review and NMA. A higher rate of adverse events (AEs) was revealed for alemtuzumab versus all other high-efficacy DMTs; for alemtuzumab (average probability of an event: 98.2%) versus placebo (86.2%); for cladribine (3.5 mg; 90.5%) versus ozanimod (1 mg; 84.2%) and placebo; as well as for ocrelizumab (95.5%) versus ozanimod, ofatumumab (88.9%), fingolimod (87.4%), natalizumab (82.8%), and placebo. No significant differences were found between drugs in terms of serious AEs except for cladribine (3.5 mg, 17.3%) versus ocrelizumab (10.3%) and ofatumumab (16.6%) versus ocrelizumab. Significant differences in AEs leading to the discontinuation of study drug were found only for ponesimod (10.1%) versus alemtuzumab (12 mg, 3.0%) and placebo (4.2%). No differences were found in terms of upper respiratory tract infections, nasopharyngitis, fatigue, and nausea between individual high-efficacy DMTs as well as between DMTs and placebo. The results of the NMA indicated a higher risk of infections for alemtuzumab (12 mg) versus ocrelizumab, for cladribine (3.5 mg) versus ofatumumab and placebo, and for ofatumumab versus placebo. For serious infections and urinary tract infections, a significant increase was found only for alemtuzumab (12 mg) versus ocrelizumab, while no differences were found between the other DMTs or between DMTs and placebo. Headache was more common for alemtuzumab (12 mg) as compared with all the other high-efficacy DMTs and placebo, as well as for cladribine versus natalizumab and fingolimod versus natalizumab.

conclusionThe commonly reported AEs are generally similar among high-efficacy DMTs. However, based on P scores for most analyzed endpoints, natalizumab and ocrelizumab were shown to be the safest DMTs. Considering the limitations of indirect comparisons, further research is needed to confirm our findings, preferably head-to-head RCTs and large observational studies.

Indexed as

Immunosuppressive AgentsMultiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-RemittingAdultAlemtuzumabCladribineFingolimod HydrochlorideHumansNatalizumabAlemtuzumabCladribineFingolimod HydrochlorideImmunosuppressive AgentsNatalizumabDisease-modifying therapiesMeta-analysisMultiple sclerosisSafetySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35713731
OpenAlexW4283072982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.