-
High-Efficacy Therapies for Treatment-Naïve Individuals with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.CNS Drugs Dec 2022There are > 18 distinct disease-modifying therapy (DMT) options covering 10 mechanisms of action currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the... (Review)
Review
There are > 18 distinct disease-modifying therapy (DMT) options covering 10 mechanisms of action currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Given the multitude of available treatment options, and recent international consensus guidelines offering differing recommendations, there is broad heterogeneity in how the DMTs are used in clinical practice. Choosing a DMT for newly diagnosed patients with MS is currently a topic of significant debate in MS care. Historically, an escalation approach to DMT was used for newly diagnosed patients with RRMS. However, the evidence for clinical benefits of early treatment with high-efficacy therapies (HETs) in this population is emerging. In this review, we provide an overview of the DMT options and MS treatment strategies, and discuss the clinical benefits of HETs (including ofatumumab, ocrelizumab, natalizumab, alemtuzumab, and cladribine) in the early stages of MS, along with safety concerns associated with these DMTs. By minimizing the accumulation of neurological damage early in the disease course, early treatment with HETs may enhance long-term clinical outcomes over the lifetime of the patient.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Multiple Sclerosis; Immunologic Factors; Natalizumab; Alemtuzumab
PubMed: 36350491
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-022-00965-7 -
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness... Jul 2023To assess the relative efficacy of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) including newer therapies (ozanimod, ponesimod,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
To assess the relative efficacy of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) including newer therapies (ozanimod, ponesimod, ublituximab) using network meta-analysis (NMA). Bayesian NMAs for annualised relapse rate (ARR) and time to 3-month and 6-month confirmed disability progression (3mCDP and 6mCDP) were conducted. For each outcome, the three most efficacious treatments versus placebo were monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies: alemtuzumab, ofatumumab, and ublituximab for ARR; alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab, and ofatumumab for 3mCDP; and alemtuzumab, natalizumab, and either ocrelizumab or ofatumumab (depending on the CDP definition used for included ofatumumab trials) for 6mCDP. The most efficacious DMTs for RMS were mAb therapies. Of the newer therapies, only ublituximab ranked among the three most efficacious treatments (for ARR).
Topics: Humans; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Alemtuzumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Recurrence
PubMed: 37265062
DOI: 10.57264/cer-2023-0016 -
Nature Communications Apr 2022T-cell large granular lymphocyte leukemia (T-LGLL) is a lymphoproliferative disease and bone marrow failure syndrome which responds to immunosuppressive therapies. We...
T-cell large granular lymphocyte leukemia (T-LGLL) is a lymphoproliferative disease and bone marrow failure syndrome which responds to immunosuppressive therapies. We show single-cell TCR coupled with RNA sequencing of CD3 T cells from 13 patients, sampled before and after alemtuzumab treatments. Effector memory T cells and loss of T cell receptor (TCR) repertoire diversity are prevalent in T-LGLL. Shared TCRA and TCRB clonotypes are absent. Deregulation of cell survival and apoptosis gene programs, and marked downregulation of apoptosis genes in CD8 clones, are prominent features of T-LGLL cells. Apoptosis genes are upregulated after alemtuzumab treatment, especially in responders than non-responders; baseline expression levels of apoptosis genes are predictive of hematologic response. Alemtuzumab does not attenuate TCR clonality, and TCR diversity is further skewed after treatment. Inferences made from analysis of single cell data inform understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms of clonal expansion and persistence in T-LGLL.
Topics: Alemtuzumab; Clone Cells; Humans; Leukemia, Large Granular Lymphocytic; Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell; Sequence Analysis, RNA
PubMed: 35411048
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-29175-x -
International Journal of Molecular... Jul 2023T-cell prolymphocytic leukemia (T-PLL) is a rare and aggressive neoplasm of mature T-cells. Most patients with T-PLL present with lymphocytosis, anemia,... (Review)
Review
T-cell prolymphocytic leukemia (T-PLL) is a rare and aggressive neoplasm of mature T-cells. Most patients with T-PLL present with lymphocytosis, anemia, thrombocytopenia, and hepatosplenomegaly. Correct identification of T-PLL is essential because treatment for this disease is distinct from that of other T-cell neoplasms. In 2019, the T-PLL International Study Group (TPLL-ISG) established criteria for the diagnosis, staging, and assessment of response to treatment of T-PLL with the goal of harmonizing research efforts and supporting clinical decision-making. T-PLL pathogenesis is commonly driven by T-cell leukemia 1 () overexpression and loss, genetic alterations that are incorporated into the TPLL-ISG diagnostic criteria. The cooperativity between family members and is seemingly unique to T-PLL across the spectrum of T-cell neoplasms. The role of the T-cell receptor, its downstream kinases, and JAK/STAT signaling are also emerging themes in disease pathogenesis and have obvious therapeutic implications. Despite improved understanding of disease pathogenesis, alemtuzumab remains the frontline therapy in the treatment of naïve patients with indications for treatment given its high response rate. Unfortunately, the responses achieved are rarely durable, and the majority of patients are not candidates for consolidation with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Improved understanding of T-PLL pathogenesis has unveiled novel therapeutic vulnerabilities that may change the natural history of this lymphoproliferative neoplasm and will be the focus of this concise review.
Topics: Humans; Leukemia, Prolymphocytic, T-Cell; Alemtuzumab; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Mutation
PubMed: 37569479
DOI: 10.3390/ijms241512106 -
JAMA Jan 2019Within 2 decades of onset, 80% of untreated patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) convert to a phase of irreversible disability accrual termed... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Observational Study
IMPORTANCE
Within 2 decades of onset, 80% of untreated patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) convert to a phase of irreversible disability accrual termed secondary progressive MS. The association between disease-modifying treatments (DMTs), and this conversion has rarely been studied and never using a validated definition.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the association between the use, the type of, and the timing of DMTs with the risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS diagnosed with a validated definition.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
Cohort study with prospective data from 68 neurology centers in 21 countries examining patients with relapsing-remitting MS commencing DMTs (or clinical monitoring) between 1988-2012 with minimum 4 years' follow-up.
EXPOSURES
The use, type, and timing of the following DMTs: interferon beta, glatiramer acetate, fingolimod, natalizumab, or alemtuzumab. After propensity-score matching, 1555 patients were included (last follow-up, February 14, 2017).
MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE
Conversion to objectively defined secondary progressive MS.
RESULTS
Of the 1555 patients, 1123 were female (mean baseline age, 35 years [SD, 10]). Patients initially treated with glatiramer acetate or interferon beta had a lower hazard of conversion to secondary progressive MS than matched untreated patients (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.81; P < .001; 5-year absolute risk, 12% [49 of 407] vs 27% [58 of 213]; median follow-up, 7.6 years [IQR, 5.8-9.6]), as did fingolimod (HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.22-0.62; P < .001; 5-year absolute risk, 7% [6 of 85] vs 32% [56 of 174]; median follow-up, 4.5 years [IQR, 4.3-5.1]); natalizumab (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.86; P = .005; 5-year absolute risk, 19% [16 of 82] vs 38% [62 of 164]; median follow-up, 4.9 years [IQR, 4.4-5.8]); and alemtuzumab (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.32-0.85; P = .009; 5-year absolute risk, 10% [4 of 44] vs 25% [23 of 92]; median follow-up, 7.4 years [IQR, 6.0-8.6]). Initial treatment with fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab was associated with a lower risk of conversion than initial treatment with glatiramer acetate or interferon beta (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44-0.99; P = .046); 5-year absolute risk, 7% [16 of 235] vs 12% [46 of 380]; median follow-up, 5.8 years [IQR, 4.7-8.0]). The probability of conversion was lower when glatiramer acetate or interferon beta was started within 5 years of disease onset vs later (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98; P = .03; 5-year absolute risk, 3% [4 of 120] vs 6% [2 of 38]; median follow-up, 13.4 years [IQR, 11-18.1]). When glatiramer acetate or interferon beta were escalated to fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab within 5 years vs later, the HR was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.88; P < .001; 5-year absolute risk, 8% [25 of 307] vs 14% [46 of 331], median follow-up, 5.3 years [IQR], 4.6-6.1).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Among patients with relapsing-remitting MS, initial treatment with fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab was associated with a lower risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS vs initial treatment with glatiramer acetate or interferon beta. These findings, considered along with these therapies' risks, may help inform decisions about DMT selection.
Topics: Adult; Alemtuzumab; Cohort Studies; Disease Progression; Female; Fingolimod Hydrochloride; Glatiramer Acetate; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Immunosuppressive Agents; Interferon-beta; Male; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Natalizumab; Time-to-Treatment
PubMed: 30644981
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.20588 -
Journal of the American Pharmacists... 2023Currently, 19 disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have been approved for the treatment of patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (RMS). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Currently, 19 disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have been approved for the treatment of patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (RMS).
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DMTs in adults with RMS.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Food and Drug Administration, and European Medicines Agency websites for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (from inception to July 2021). Eligible RCTs evaluated approved treatments for RMS as monotherapy and reported at least one of the primary outcome measures of interest. The primary outcome was efficacy (annualized relapse rate and 12-week confirmed disability progression) and safety (serious adverse events [AEs] and discontinuation due to AEs). We assessed the risk of bias (RoB) of included studies using the Cochrane RoB tool version 2.0 (https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d5928) for RCTs. Surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) was used to rank therapies and to assess quality of general evidence, respectively. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to rank therapies and to assess quality of general evidence.
RESULTS
A total of 43 records represent 45 RCTs selected for network meta-analysis. In total, 30,720 participants (median of 732; interquartile range: 248-931) were included, of which 67% were female. By SUCRA analysis, alemtuzumab (94.3%) presented the highest probability of being the best alternative for annualized relapse rate, whereas ofatumumab (93.5%) presented the highest probability of being the best alternative for 12-week confirmed disability progression. Interferon beta-1b subcutaneous (87.0%) presented the highest probability of the best safety among all DMTs for serious AEs, whereas alemtuzumab (92.4%) presented the highest probability of the best safety among all DMTs for discontinuation due to AEs.
CONCLUSION
Network meta-analysis shows that alemtuzumab and ofatumumab present the highest efficacy among DMTs. Because there is little difference between these probabilities for many treatments, health professionals should use clinical shared decision making when formulating treatment plans with patients.
Topics: United States; Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Alemtuzumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Multiple Sclerosis; Chronic Disease; Recurrence
PubMed: 36055929
DOI: 10.1016/j.japh.2022.07.009 -
Neurological Sciences : Official... Sep 2022This study aimed to compare the safety profile of high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) natalizumab, fingolimod, alemtuzumab, cladribine, ocrelizumab,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to compare the safety profile of high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) natalizumab, fingolimod, alemtuzumab, cladribine, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, ozanimod, as well as a potentially high-efficacy DMT, ponesimod, in adult patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).
METHODS
A systematic review with frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least 48-week follow-up investigating the use of natalizumab, fingolimod, alemtuzumab, cladribine, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, ozanimod, and ponesimod, as well as other DMTs, in adult patients with RRMS. Eligible studies were identified by two reviewers in MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. The Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess the risk of bias for RCTs was used.
RESULTS
A total of 33 RCTs were included in the systematic review and NMA. A higher rate of adverse events (AEs) was revealed for alemtuzumab versus all other high-efficacy DMTs; for alemtuzumab (average probability of an event: 98.2%) versus placebo (86.2%); for cladribine (3.5 mg; 90.5%) versus ozanimod (1 mg; 84.2%) and placebo; as well as for ocrelizumab (95.5%) versus ozanimod, ofatumumab (88.9%), fingolimod (87.4%), natalizumab (82.8%), and placebo. No significant differences were found between drugs in terms of serious AEs except for cladribine (3.5 mg, 17.3%) versus ocrelizumab (10.3%) and ofatumumab (16.6%) versus ocrelizumab. Significant differences in AEs leading to the discontinuation of study drug were found only for ponesimod (10.1%) versus alemtuzumab (12 mg, 3.0%) and placebo (4.2%). No differences were found in terms of upper respiratory tract infections, nasopharyngitis, fatigue, and nausea between individual high-efficacy DMTs as well as between DMTs and placebo. The results of the NMA indicated a higher risk of infections for alemtuzumab (12 mg) versus ocrelizumab, for cladribine (3.5 mg) versus ofatumumab and placebo, and for ofatumumab versus placebo. For serious infections and urinary tract infections, a significant increase was found only for alemtuzumab (12 mg) versus ocrelizumab, while no differences were found between the other DMTs or between DMTs and placebo. Headache was more common for alemtuzumab (12 mg) as compared with all the other high-efficacy DMTs and placebo, as well as for cladribine versus natalizumab and fingolimod versus natalizumab.
CONCLUSION
The commonly reported AEs are generally similar among high-efficacy DMTs. However, based on P scores for most analyzed endpoints, natalizumab and ocrelizumab were shown to be the safest DMTs. Considering the limitations of indirect comparisons, further research is needed to confirm our findings, preferably head-to-head RCTs and large observational studies.
Topics: Adult; Alemtuzumab; Cladribine; Fingolimod Hydrochloride; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Natalizumab; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 35713731
DOI: 10.1007/s10072-022-06197-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune, T-cell-dependent, inflammatory, demyelinating disease of the central nervous system, with an unpredictable course. Current MS... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune, T-cell-dependent, inflammatory, demyelinating disease of the central nervous system, with an unpredictable course. Current MS therapies focus on treating and preventing exacerbations, and avoiding the progression of disability. At present, there is no treatment that is capable of safely and effectively reaching these objectives. Clinical trials suggest that alemtuzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, could be a promising option for MS.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of alemtuzumab alone or associated with other treatments in people with any form of MS.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 21 June 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with any subtype of MS comparing alemtuzumab alone or associated with other medications versus placebo; another active drug; or alemtuzumab in another dose, regimen, or duration.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our co-primary outcomes were 1. relapse-free survival, 2. sustained disease progression, and 3. number of participants experiencing at least one adverse event. Our secondary outcomes were 4. participants free of clinical disability, 5. quality of life, 6. change in disability, 7. fatigue, 8. new or enlarging lesions on resonance imaging, and 9. dropouts. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three RCTs (1713 participants) comparing intravenous alemtuzumab versus subcutaneous interferon beta-1a for relapsing-remitting MS. Participants were treatment-naive (two studies) or had experienced at least one relapse after interferon or glatiramer (one study). Alemtuzumab was given at doses of 12 mg/day or 24 mg/day for five days at months 0 and 12, or 24 mg/day for three days at months 12 and 24. Participants in the interferon beta-1a group received 44 μg three times weekly. Alemtuzumab 12 mg: 1. may improve relapse-free survival at 36 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18 to 0.53; 1 study, 221 participants; low-certainty evidence); 2. may improve sustained disease progression-free survival at 36 months (HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.56; 1 study, 223 participants; low-certainty evidence); 3. may make little to no difference on the proportion of participants with at least one adverse event at 36 months (risk ratio [RR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.02; 1 study, 224 participants; low-certainty evidence), although the proportion of participants with at least one adverse event was high with both drugs; 4. may slightly reduce disability at 36 months (mean difference [MD] -0.70, 95% CI -1.04 to -0.36; 1 study, 223 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain regarding the risk of dropouts at 36 months (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.14; 1 study, 224 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Alemtuzumab 24 mg: 1. may improve relapse-free survival at 36 months (HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.40; 1 study, 221 participants; low-certainty evidence); 2. may improve sustained disease progression-free survival at 36 months (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.69; 1 study, 221 participants; low-certainty evidence); 3. may make little to no difference on the proportion of participants with at least one adverse event at 36 months (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.02; 1 study, 215 participants; low-certainty evidence), although the proportion of participants with at least one adverse event was high with both drugs; 4. may slightly reduce disability at 36 months (MD -0.83, 95% CI -1.16 to -0.50; 1 study, 221 participants; low-certainty evidence); 5. may reduce the risk of dropouts at 36 months (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.57; 1 study, 215 participants; low-certainty evidence). For quality of life, fatigue, and participants free of clinical disease activity, the studies either did not consider these outcomes or they used different measuring tools to those planned in this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared with interferon beta-1a, alemtuzumab may improve relapse-free survival and sustained disease progression-free survival, and make little to no difference on the proportion of participants with at least one adverse event for people with relapsing-remitting MS at 36 months. The certainty of the evidence for these results was very low to low.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Alemtuzumab; Interferon beta-1a; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
PubMed: 37272540
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011203.pub3 -
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy Mar 2018Alemtuzumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets for the destruction CD52+ cells, particularly B and T cells. Alemtuzumab is approved in more than 50 countries around... (Review)
Review
Alemtuzumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets for the destruction CD52+ cells, particularly B and T cells. Alemtuzumab is approved in more than 50 countries around the world for the treatment of adult patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (MS). Areas covered: In this review, the authors summarize biological, clinical and safety data related to the use of alemtuzumab in patients with MS. The authors then provide their expert opinion on alemtuzumab and the field as of whole before providing their perspectives for the future. Expert opinion: Alemtuzumab is highly efficacious; more so than first line treatments but comparable to natalizumab. Treatment schedule makes alemtuzumab administration easy and attractive to patients. However, its safety profile makes it a choice for a very limited number of patients, in a specific disease window. As of now, a cure for MS remains elusive and there is an unmet need for a safe and highly potent agent at the level of and beyond the blood brain barrier.
Topics: Alemtuzumab; CD52 Antigen; Clinical Trials as Topic; Half-Life; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Natalizumab; Product Surveillance, Postmarketing; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29309202
DOI: 10.1080/14712598.2018.1425388 -
Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders Jul 2023Alemtuzumab is a highly effective treatment for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), but in recent years safety-related concerns had emerged due to description... (Observational Study)
Observational Study
BACKGROUND
Alemtuzumab is a highly effective treatment for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), but in recent years safety-related concerns had emerged due to description of novel serious side effects not registered in CARE-MS I and CARE-MS II phase 3 studies, nor in TOPAZ extension study. Data about alemtuzumab use in real clinical practice are limited and based mainly on retrospective studies with small sample sizes. Therefore, more information about effectiveness and safety of alemtuzumab in this context is needed.
METHODS
A multicenter observational prospective study to investigate effectivity and safety of alemtuzumab in a real-world setting was performed. Primary endpoints were the change in annualized relapse rate (ARR), and in disability measured by EDSS score. Secondary endpoints were the cumulative probability of confirmed 6-month disability improvement and worsening. Disability worsening and disability improvement were considered when the EDSS score was increased or decreased, respectively, in 1 point if baseline EDSS score was <5.0, or in 0.5 point if baseline EDSS score was ≥5.5, confirmed over 6 months. Other secondary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved NEDA-3 status (absence of clinical relapses, disability EDSS progression, and MRI disease activity as depicted by new/enlarging T2 lesions or Gadolinium enhancing T1 lesions). Adverse events also were recorded.
RESULTS
A total of 195 RRMS patients (70% female) who started alemtuzumab treatment were included. Mean of follow-up was 2.38 years. Alemtuzumab significantly reduced the annualized relapse rate from baseline with risk reductions of 86%, 83.5%, and 84%, at 12, 24, and 36 months of follow-up respectively (Friedman test, p-value < 0.05 for all comparisons). Alemtuzumab also significantly reduced EDSS score over one and two years after starting alemtuzumab treatment (Friedman test, p-value<0.001 for both comparisons). A high proportion of patients presented confirmed 6-month stability or disability improvement (92%, 82%, and 79%, over 1, 2 and 3 years of follow-up respectively). The proportion of patients who retained NEDA-3 status at 12, 24 and 36 months were 61%, 49%, and 42%, respectively. Baseline characteristics associated with a lower probability of achieving NEDA-3 were younger age, sex female, high ARR, elevated number of previous treatments, and switch from a second line therapy. Infusion related reactions were the most frequent adverse event observed. The most common infections were urinary tract infections (50%), and upper respiratory tract infections (19%) over the 3 years of follow- up. Secondary thyroid autoimmunity was developed in 18.5% of patients.
CONCLUSION
Alemtuzumab has demonstrated in real clinical practice high effectiveness in controlling multiple sclerosis activity, and no unexpected adverse events were observed.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Alemtuzumab; Retrospective Studies; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Recurrence
PubMed: 37229800
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2023.104762