SynthesisBMC neurology2025
Comparative efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab in relapsing-remitting and primary progressive multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neuroinflammation and Mental Health in Multiple Sclerosis and Autoimmune Encephalitis: Bridging Biological Mechanisms and Psychosocial Factors.Archives of internal medicine research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis meta-analysis synthesizes evidence from all available randomized trials and observational cohort studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab compared to placebo or active comparator therapies.
backgroundOcrelizumab (OCR), a monoclonal antibody targeting CD20-positive B-cells, is a high-efficacy therapy for multiple sclerosis (MS). While pivotal trials demonstrate its efficacy in reducing relapses, its impact on disability progression and its safety profile in broader, real-world populations require further synthesis.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered on PROSPERO (CRD420251012243). We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central until August, 2025, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing OCR to placebo or active comparators in adults with MS. Primary outcomes were relapse-related measures and confirmed disability progression (CDP); safety outcomes included infections and malignancies.
resultsTwenty-five studies (4 RCTs, 21 observational) were included. OCR was associated with a significant 25% reduction in relapse rates compared to placebo (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61-0.93, p = 0.01). However, no significant differences were observed for achieving No Evidence of Disease Activity (NEDA) (RR 1.11, p = 0.13) or CDP (RR 0.90, p = 0.49). Safety analyses revealed no increased risk of overall adverse events, serious infections, or malignancies with OCR. Considerable heterogeneity was observed for several outcomes.
conclusionThis study confirms OCR's significant efficacy in reducing relapse rates and its manageable safety profile in MS. However, its benefits on composite endpoints like NEDA and on halting disability progression remain uncertain and variable, highlighting a need for long-term studies to better define its role in mitigating disease progression.
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.