ArticleNeurology and therapy2026
Early Versus Delayed Treatment with Ocrelizumab: A Multicenter, Real-World Observational Study in People with Multiple Sclerosis.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGrowing evidence suggests that first-line (1L) treatment with high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (HE-DMTs) may have greater clinical benefit in multiple sclerosis (MS) than delaying HE-DMTs to second- or subsequent-line (2L+) therapy. However, MS treatment is often initiated using an escalation approach, involving initial treatment with low- to moderate-efficacy DMTs followed by escalation to HE-DMTs in the presence of new disease activity or disability worsening. Ocrelizumab is a HE-DMT approved for the treatment of relapsing and primary progressive MS, but real-world outcomes of ocrelizumab as a 1L vs 2L+ therapy are not well characterized.
methodsReal-world data from people with MS (pwMS) receiving treatment at four centers in the USA were analyzed. The effectiveness of ocrelizumab when administered as 1L or 2L+ treatment was compared for up to 60 months in follow-up. The primary outcome was time to confirmed disability worsening (based on Patient-Determined Disease Steps [PDDS]). Secondary outcomes were time to requiring a walking aid (PDDS ≥ 4), annualized patient-reported relapse rate, and magnetic resonance imaging measures (e.g., brain volume and number and volume of new T2 lesions).
resultsA total of 403 pwMS (1L n = 309, 2L+ n = 94) were identified. Overall, pwMS who received 1L ocrelizumab experienced less confirmed disease worsening (25.8% vs 42.6%; P = 0.03) and requirement for a walking aid (6.5% vs 27.4%; P < 0.01) compared with the 2L+ cohort. The 1L group also had a significantly lower change in T2 lesion volume (mean difference - 0.797 mL; P < 0.05) and a lower risk of developing new T2 lesions than the 2L+ group (incidence rate ratio 0.88 [95% CI 0.78-0.99]; P = 0.04). Relapse rate and brain volume outcomes were not significantly different between groups.
conclusionThis study contributes to the growing pool of evidence that 1L treatment with HE-DMTs such as ocrelizumab can improve clinical outcomes for pwMS compared with delaying HE-DMT to 2L+ .
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.