ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Many patients treated with Natalizumab experience wearing-off symptoms (WoS) towards the end of the administration cycle. During the pandemic we advised and asked patients undergoing treatment with Natalizumab if they wanted to be shifted from a standard interval dosing (StID of 4 weeks) to an extended interval dosing (ExID of 5-6 weeks), regardless of their JCV index. Our main objective was to study prevalence and incidence of WoS when ExID was adopted. METHODS: We enrolled 86 patients, from May 2020 to January 2021, evaluated at baseline and during a 6 months follow-up with a survey focused on WoS, Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and MRI. RESULTS: Among the 86 patients, 32 (37.2%) reported WoS. Most common one was fatigue (93.7%). Mean EDSS was higher in the group reporting WoS (3.8 WoS vs 3.1 non-WoS, p < 0.05). Sphincterial function was the EDSS item that significantly differed between the WoS group and the non-WoS group (1.4 WoS vs 0.6 non-WoS, p < 0.001). WoS correlate with the FSS scale (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Adopting an extended interval dosing does not result in significantly different occurrence of WoS between the ExID and the StID populations, in our cohort of patients. Interestingly, there is a strong correlation between WoS and a higher EDSS and FSS. Safety and efficacy of Natalizumab with ExID are relatively preserved in our study.
ABSTRACT
In the COVID-19 pandemic era, safety concerns have been raised regarding the risk of severe infection following administration of ocrelizumab (OCR), a B-cell-depleting therapy. We enrolled all relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients who received maintenance doses of OCR from January 2020 to June 2021. Data were extracted in December 2021. Standard interval dosing (SID) was defined as a regular maintenance interval of OCR infusion every 6 months, whereas extended interval dosing (EID) was defined as an OCR infusion delay of at least 4 weeks. Three infusions were considered in defining SID vs. EID (infusions A, B, and C). Infusion A was the last infusion before January 2020. The primary study outcome was a comparison of disease activity during the A-C interval, which was defined as either clinical (new relapses) or radiological (new lesions on T1-gadolinium or T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences). Second, we aimed to assess confirmed disability progression (CDP). A total cohort of 278 patients (174 on SID and 104 on EID) was enrolled. Patients who received OCR on EID had a longer disease duration and a higher rate of vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (p < 0.05). EID was associated with an increased risk of MRI activity during the A-C interval (OR 5.373, 95% CI 1.203-24.001, p = 0.028). Being on SID or EID did not influence CDP (V-Cramer 0.47, p = 0.342). EID seemed to be associated with a higher risk of MRI activity in our cohort. EID needs to be carefully considered for OCR-treated patients.