Ocrelizumab in MS patients with persistence of disease activity after alemtuzumab: A multi-center Italian study.

BACKGROUND: The reason why some multiple sclerosis (MS) patients show disease activity after alemtuzumab (ALM) is still unclear, but ocrelizumab (OCR) could represent an interesting sequential therapeutic approach. OBJECTIVES: To investigate safety and efficacy of OCR in MS patients with disease activity after two ALM courses. METHODS: Observational retrospective multi-centers Italian cohort study. RESULTS: Seventy-two subjects were included. Mean follow-up (FU) was 2.4 (±1) years. Forty-five patients (62.5%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE), with infections accounting for 96.7% of cases. A reduction in total lymphocytes was observed between OCR start and 6 months FU, driven by BCD19+ lymphocytes depletion (p < 0.001). Immunoglobulin M (IgM) levels decreased between OCR start and 6 months FU (p < 0.001). At 2-year FU, relapse, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity and disability worsening-free survival were 92.1%, 90.8%, and 89.2%. The evidence of inflammatory activity between the two ALM courses was associated with higher risk of relapse, MRI activity, and NEDA-3 status loss in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS; p = 0.02, p = 0.05, p = 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: OCR after two ALM courses seemed to be safe and effective. Early IgM hypogammaglobulinemia occurred in a high proportion of patients. The evidence of inflammatory activity between ALM courses seemed to increase the risk of MS re-activation on OCR treatment.

Ocrelizumab use in multiple sclerosis: a real-world experience in a changing therapeutic scenario.

INTRODUCTION: CD20-depleting therapies are a real milestone in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). This study examined the ocrelizumab (OCR) use in patients with primary progressive (PP) and relapsing remitting (RR) MS, also evaluating the predictors of treatment response. METHODS: Patients with MS treated with OCR between 2017 and 2022 were included, and OCR use trends examined. The patients' characteristics were assessed at baseline and after 24 months of OCR to assess the NEDA-3 status. RESULTS: This study included 421 patients: 33 (7.9%) with PP and 388 (92.1%) with RR MS. Among these, 67 (17.3%) were naïve, while switchers from first- and second-line disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) were 199 (51.3%) and 122 (31.4%), respectively. An increasing trend in OCR use was reported. For six patients treated with rituximab, OCR was chosen to improve tolerability; for 390 switcher patients, the choice was due to ineffectiveness; and for 25, as an exit strategy from natalizumab due to JC virus positivity. NEDA-3 status was calculated for subjects exposed to 24 months of OCR and was achieved by 163/192 (84.9%) RR patients and 9/16 (56%) PP patients, with younger age (p = 0.048) and annualized relapse rate in the year previous to OCR (p = 0.005) emerging as determinants. For the 25 patients who switched to OCR after natalizumab, no clinical or MRI activity after 12 months was reported. CONCLUSION: OCR has been confirmed to be a highly efficacious option for patients with PP and RR MS, even proving to be a valid exit strategy for natalizumab.

Cybersickness in People with Multiple Sclerosis Exposed to Immersive Virtual Reality.

Together with the wide range of possible benefits for the rehabilitation/training of people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) and other neurologic conditions, exposure to immersive virtual reality (VR) has often been associated with unpleasant symptoms, such as transient dizziness, headache, nausea, disorientation and impaired postural control (i.e., cybersickness). Since these symptoms can significantly impact the safety and tolerability of the treatment, it appears important to correctly estimate their presence and magnitude. Given the existing data scarcity, this study aims to assess the existence and severity of possible adverse effects associated with exposure to immersive VR in a cohort of pwMS using both objective measurements of postural control effectiveness and subjective evaluations of perceived symptoms. To this aim, postural sway under upright quiet posture (in the presence and absence of visual input) of 56 pwMS with an Expanded Disability Status Scale score (EDSS) in the range of 0-6.5 (mean EDSS 2.3) and 33 unaffected individuals was measured before and after a 10-min immersive VR session and at 10 min follow-up on the basis of center of pressure (COP) trajectories. The severity of cybersickness symptoms associated with VR exposure was also self-rated by the participants using the Italian version of the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ). Temporary impairments of postural control in terms of significantly increased sway area were observed after the VR session only in pwMS with mild-moderate disability (i.e., EDSS in the range of 2.5-6.5) in the presence of visual input. No changes were observed in pwMS with low disability (EDSS 0-2) and unaffected individuals. In contrast, when the visual input was removed, there was a decrease in sway area (pwMS with mild-moderate disability) and COP path length relating to the use of VR (pwMS with mild-moderate disability and unaffected individuals), thus suggesting a sort of "balance training effect". Even in this case, the baseline values were restored at follow-up. All participants, regardless of their status, experienced significant post-VR side effects, especially in terms of blurred vision and nausea. Taken together, the findings of the present study suggest that a short immersive VR session negatively (eyes open) and positively (eyes closed) impacts the postural control of pwMS and causes significant disorientation. However, such effects are of limited duration. While it is reasonable to state that immersive VR is sufficiently safe and tolerable to not be contraindicated in the rehabilitation/training of pwMS, in order to reduce possible negative effects and maximize the efficacy, safety and comfort of the treatment, it appears necessary to develop specific guidelines that consider important factors like individual susceptibility, maximum exposure time according to the specific features of the simulation, posture to adopt and protocols to assess objective and perceived effects on participants.

ChatGPT vs. neurologists: a cross-sectional study investigating preference, satisfaction ratings and perceived empathy in responses among people living with multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: ChatGPT is an open-source natural language processing software that replies to users' queries. We conducted a cross-sectional study to assess people living with Multiple Sclerosis' (PwMS) preferences, satisfaction, and empathy toward two alternate responses to four frequently-asked questions, one authored by a group of neurologists, the other by ChatGPT. METHODS: An online form was sent through digital communication platforms. PwMS were blind to the author of each response and were asked to express their preference for each alternate response to the four questions. The overall satisfaction was assessed using a Likert scale (1-5); the Consultation and Relational Empathy scale was employed to assess perceived empathy. RESULTS: We included 1133 PwMS (age, 45.26 ± 11.50 years; females, 68.49%). ChatGPT's responses showed significantly higher empathy scores (Coeff = 1.38; 95% CI = 0.65, 2.11; p > z < 0.01), when compared with neurologists' responses. No association was found between ChatGPT' responses and mean satisfaction (Coeff = 0.03; 95% CI = - 0.01, 0.07; p = 0.157). College graduate, when compared with high school education responder, had significantly lower likelihood to prefer ChatGPT response (IRR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.79, 0.95; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT-authored responses provided higher empathy than neurologists. Although AI holds potential, physicians should prepare to interact with increasingly digitized patients and guide them on responsible AI use. Future development should consider tailoring AIs' responses to individual characteristics. Within the progressive digitalization of the population, ChatGPT could emerge as a helpful support in healthcare management rather than an alternative.