ArticleCurrent neuropharmacology2024
Ocrelizumab Extended Interval Dosing in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: An Italian Experience.
Article in Current neuropharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical and radiological activity after extended interval and standard interval dosing of ocrelizumab in multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Pooled it
- Optimizing the Use of Anti-CD20 Agents in Multiple Sclerosis and Other Autoimmune Central Nervous System Disorders: A Narrative Review.Neurology and therapy · 2026Review
- De-escalation and Discontinuation of Disease-Modifying Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024Review
- Ocrelizumab use in multiple sclerosis: a real-world experience in a changing therapeutic scenario.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024Article
- Safety and efficacy of extended versus standard interval dosing of anti-CD20 therapy in multiple sclerosis - A meta-analysis.Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinicalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe intervals between two courses of anti CD20 therapies in the COVID19 pandemic era provided the opportunity to individually delay therapy, known as extended interval dosing (EID).
methodsWe collect real-world data on patients with primary progressive MS (PPMS) treated with Ocrelizumab (OCR) during the COVID'19 pandemic. The observation period in which the standard interval dosing (SID) or EID occurred (always a maintenance cycle, 600 mg) was from January 2020 to June 2021. All patients had two infusions during the observation period. Our first aim was to compare confirmed disability progression (CDP) between SID and EID patients.
resultsFrom a total cohort of 410 patients treated with OCR, 96 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All patients received two infusions during the index window, 71 received only SID infusions whilst 25 received at least one EID infusion throughout the entire follow-up. During the entire available follow-up (median 10 months, IQR 7-11), CDP was recorded in 5 patients (3/71, 4.2% SID and 2/25, 8% EID, V-Cramer = 0.141, p-value = 0.167). EID regimen did not influence the risk of CDP during the investigated follow up.
conclusionIn our multicentre real-world cohort, the EID regimen in PPMS patients did not result in increased CDP during the available follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.