ArticleAnnals of clinical and translational neurology2025
Performance of Composite Endpoints Defining Progression Independent of Relapse Activity in Multiple Sclerosis.
Article in Annals of clinical and translational neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Parallel-Group Study To Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Ocrelizumab in Comparison to Interferon Beta-1a (Rebif®) in Patients With Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Parallel-Group Study To Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Ocrelizumab in Comparison to Interferon Beta-1a (Rebif) in Patients With Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis
An Open-Label, Single-Arm Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Safety of Ocrelizumab in Patients With Early Stage Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe characteristics and utility of composite progression independent of relapse activity (cPIRA; worsening on the Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS], or 9-Hole Peg Test, or Timed 25-Foot Walk Test) were evaluated as an endpoint in relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) trials using the ENSEMBLE (NCT03085810) and pooled OPERA I/II (NCT01247324/NCT01412333) studies.
methodsWe evaluated: (i) different definitions and the impact of rebaselining post-relapse on cPIRA, (ii) cPIRA and biomarkers (MRI activity and serum neurofilament light [sNfL] levels), (iii) sustainability of cPIRA events, and (iv) cPIRA impact on future outcomes, in patients treated with ocrelizumab (600 mg, OPERA I/II [n = 827] and ENSEMBLE [n = 1225]) or interferon β-1a (44 μg, OPERA I/II [n = 829]).
resultsLow disease activity (relapses/new MRI lesions) rendered rebaselining unnecessary for cPIRA status in > 95% of ocrelizumab-treated participants, and variations of cPIRA definitions yielded similar event rates. In OPERA I/II and ENSEMBLE ocrelizumab arms, cPIRA events were independent of MRI activity (86.5% and 95.5%, respectively), and occurred when sNfL was low (risk of cPIRA, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.67; p = 0.11 and 0.57; p = 0.003); more cPIRA events were sustained until study end with interferon β-1a (80.3% OPERA I/II) vs. ocrelizumab (63.2% OPERA I/II, 56.6% ENSEMBLE). Across studies and treatments, cPIRA was associated with an increased risk of subsequent worsening on the EDSS (HR, 1.62-1.74; p = 0.121-0.037), Symbol Digit Modalities Test (HR, 1.16-2.62; p = 0.54-0.009), and Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 physical scale (HR, 1.76; p = 0.064).
interpretationcPIRA is clinically relevant and demonstrates utility as a sensitive endpoint in MS clinical trials.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: OPERA I (NCT01247324; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01247324); OPERA II (NCT01412333; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01412333); ENSEMBLE (NCT03085810; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03085810).
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.