ArticleNeurology international2024
Utilization of Ocrelizumab within Different Treatment Strategies for Multiple Sclerosis: A 5-Year Population-Based Study.
Article in Neurology international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Subcutaneous Ocrelizumab for the Treatment of Relapsing Forms of Multiple Sclerosis: A Budget Impact Model.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Real-World, Long-Term Outcomes with Cladribine Tablets Versus Other Oral Treatments Among Patients with Multiple Sclerosis.Neurology and therapy · 2026Article
- Comparative effectiveness, safety and persistence of ocrelizumab versus natalizumab in multiple sclerosis: A real-world, multi-center, propensity score-matched study.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2025Article
- Treatment persistence and clinical outcomes in patients starting B cell depleting therapies within the Swiss MS Cohort.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
12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aim to provide up-to-date real-world evidence on the persistence, adherence, healthcare resource utilization, and costs of multiple sclerosis (MS) by comparing ocrelizumab to other disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) and within different DMT sequences.
methodsWe included 3371 people with MS who first received or switched DMT prescriptions from January 2018 to December 2022; they were identified through hospital discharge records, drug prescriptions, and exemption codes from the Campania Region (South Italy). We calculated persistence (time from the first prescription to discontinuation or switching to another DMT), adherence (proportion of days covered (PDC)), DMT costs, and MS hospital admissions and related costs.
resultsThe most frequently prescribed DMT was dimethyl fumarate (n = 815; age 38.90 ± 11.91 years; 69.5% females), followed by ocrelizumab (n = 682; age 46.46 ± 11.29 years; 56.3%); 28.8% of the patients treated with ocrelizumab were naïve to DMTs. Using ocrelizumab as a statistical reference, the risk of discontinuation was higher for other highly active (HR = 6.32; 95%CI = 3.16, 12.63;
conclusionsFrom 2018 to 2022, ocrelizumab was among the most frequently prescribed DMTs, with 28.8% prescriptions to incident MS patients, confirming its relevance in clinical practice. Ocrelizumab was associated with the highest persistence and adherence, pointing towards its favorable benefit-risk profile. The costs of ocrelizumab were lower than those of other highly active DMTs.
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.