ArticleAnnals of clinical and translational neurology2024
A comparison of natalizumab and ocrelizumab on disease progression in multiple sclerosis.
Article in Annals of clinical and translational neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab in relapsing-remitting and primary progressive multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Real-World Data for Safety Studies: Challenges and Opportunities From the Italian Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders Register.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2026Article
- Big data in multiple sclerosis.Current opinion in neurology · 2026Review
- Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation affects long-term progression independent of relapse activity in aggressive multiple sclerosis: a comparative matched study.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2026Article
- Early Intensive Versus Escalation Approach: Ten-Year Impact on Disability in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2025Observational
- Long-Term Evaluation of Effectiveness and Immunological Implications of Ocrelizumab in a Real-World Cohort.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2025Article
- 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
- A Window into New Insights on Progression Independent of Relapse Activity in Multiple Sclerosis: Role of Therapies and Current Perspective.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- CONFIDENCE treatment success: long-term real-world effectiveness and safety of ocrelizumab in Germany.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveNo direct comparisons of the effect of natalizumab and ocrelizumab on progression independent of relapse activity (PIRA) and relapse-associated worsening (RAW) events are currently available. We aimed to compare the risk of achieving first 6 months confirmed PIRA and RAW events and irreversible Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) 4.0 and 6.0 in a cohort of naïve patients treated with natalizumab or ocrelizumab from the Italian Multiple Sclerosis Register.
methodsPatients with a first visit within 1 year from onset, treated with natalizumab or ocrelizumab, and ≥3 visits were extracted. Pairwise propensity score-matched analyses were performed. Risk of reaching the first PIRA, RAW, and EDSS 4.0 and 6.0 events were estimated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to show cumulative probabilities of reaching outcomes.
resultsIn total, 770 subjects were included (natalizumab = 568; ocrelizumab = 212) and the propensity score-matching retrieved 195 pairs. No RAW events were found in natalizumab group and only 1 was reported in ocrelizumab group. A first PIRA event was reached by 23 natalizumab and 25 ocrelizumab exposed patients; 7 natalizumab- and 10 ocrelizumab-treated patients obtained an irreversible EDSS 4.0, while 13 natalizumab- and 15 ocrelizumab-treated patients reached an irreversible EDSS 6.0. No differences between the two groups were found in the risk (HR, 95%CI) of reaching a first PIRA (1.04, 0.59-1.84; p = 0.88) event, an irreversible EDSS 4.0 (1.23, 0.57-2.66; p = 0.60) and 6.0 (0.93, 0.32-2.68; p = 0.89).
interpretationBoth medications strongly suppress RAW events and, in the short term, the risk of achieving PIRA events, EDSS 4.0 and 6.0 milestones is not significantly different.
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.