ArticleCurrent neuropharmacology2026
Ocrelizumab Discontinuation vs. Continuation After Safety Events: Comparative Insights from MSBase.
Article in Current neuropharmacology, 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
introductionOcrelizumab (OCR), a CD20+ B-cell depleting monoclonal antibody, is a highly effective therapy for Multiple Sclerosis (MS). However, safety concerns may lead to treatment discontinuation, raising questions about the clinical consequences of such decisions. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis propensity score-matched study utilized data from the MSBase registry to compare outcomes between patients discontinuing OCR due to safety concerns ("Switchers") and those continuing treatment ("Continuers"). Matching was performed using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to balance treatment duration and baseline characteristics. Primary outcomes included annualized relapse rate (ARR), time to first relapse, 24-48 weeks confirmed disability worsening (CDW), and progression independent of relapse activity (PIRA).
resultsFrom an initial cohort of 310 Switchers and 1,315 Continuers, 66 patients who experienced at least one safety event and switched from OCR were matched with 66 Continuers. PS-IPTW analyses revealed higher ARR in Switchers (0.08, 95% CI: 0.05-0.14) versus Continuers (0.038, 95% CI: 0.02-0.07; p=0.040). Time to first relapse showed no significant difference (HR=2.23, 95% CI: 0.68-7.28; p=0.183). Trends toward increased CDW24 weeks risk (PS-IPTW HR=2.11, 95% CI: 0.93-4.75; p=0.073), while no significant difference was found at 48 weeks (HR=1.81, 95% CI: 0.83-3.30; p=0.201). PIRA risk showed a trend toward an increase in Switchers (HR=2.45, 95% CI: 0.95-6.29; p=0.063). DISCUSSION: In this propensity-score-matched analysis, OCR discontinuation due to safety concerns was associated with increased relapse activity and trends toward greater disability progression. These findings highlight the importance of maintaining therapeutic intensity and systematic monitoring during treatment transitions to mitigate safety risks.
conclusionFurther research is needed to develop strategies for effectively managing adverse events to optimize patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.