ArticleAnnals of clinical and translational neurology2025
Comparative Effect of Standard Versus Extended Interval Dosing of Rituximab or Ocrelizumab 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. 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to investigate the comparative effectiveness of standard versus personalized extended interval dosing of anti-CD20 therapy on clinical and sub-clinical outcomes in multiple sclerosis.
methodsClinical information was collected prospectively on Research Electronic Data Capture. Patients with age ≥ 18 years old, confirmed diagnosis of multiple sclerosis, treatment with B-cell depleting drug (Rituximab and Ocrelizumab), and minimum follow-up of 12 months with at least 3 clinical visits and at least 3 infusions of medication were included and divided into an extended interval dosing group, a standard interval dosing group, and a converters group who switched from standard to extended interval dosing. Retinal measures were obtained using spectral domain Optical Coherence Tomography. Magnetic resonance imaging acquisitions were performed in two centers using a standardized conventional imaging protocol for multiple sclerosis.
resultsPatients had a median clinical follow-up of 3.5 (0.44-7.3) years, retinal OCT follow-up of 2.6 (1.4) years, and MRI follow-up of 2.6 (1.1) years. Annualized changes in clinical measures, retinal measures, and brain volumetric measures were similar between the 3 groups. Multivariate regression analyses also showed no differences.
interpretationWe found no differences in clinical or sub-clinical outcomes between patients treated with standard interval dosing, patients converting from standard to extended interval dosing, and patients on extended interval dosing of B-cell depleting drugs.
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.