5PSQ-135 Long-term activity-free status in multiple sclerosis with ocrelizumab: real-world evidence

<h3>Background and Importance</h3> Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune disorder in the central nervous system. Ocrelizumab, a humanised monoclonal antibody, has shown promise in reducing disease activity and progression in MS. <h3>Aim and Objectives</h3> To assess the real-world effectiveness of Ocrelizumab in sustaining disease-free status in patients with MS and to differentiate its effectiveness between patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) and primary progressive MS (PPMS). <h3>Material and Methods</h3> This study design incorporates both retrospective and prospective elements, to evaluate No Evidence of Disease Activity (NEDA) in patients with MS between January’18-September’24 in a second-level hospital. Patient medical histories were obtained through MambrinoXXI, and Farmatools using the outpatients’ module. Inclusion criteria: MS diagnosis, treated with ocrelizumab. Studied variables: Sex, age, MS diagnosis type (RRMS or PPMS), history of previous disease-modifying therapies, initial Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSSi) score, time to treatment and duration in weeks before the re-emergence of disease activity. Statistical Analysis: Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier Survival Analysis using SPSS v.15.0 alongside a confidence interval (CI) of 95%. <h3>Results</h3> Forty-three patients were included in this study, where 23 (53,49%) were men, median age 51±9,9 years-old. 24 (55,81%) had RRMS diagnosis, and a total of 26 (60,47%) patients received previous disease-modifying therapies. Mean EDSSi was 5,21 (ranging from 0,5–9). Median time elapsed between MS diagnosis and Ocrelizumab initiation was 5.65 years. Analysis of NEDA for all patients, without stratification: 22 (51,16%) experienced worsening of symptoms related to the progression of MS. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a median NEDA of 123 weeks (CI: 68,48–177,52). Stratifying patients according to diagnosis revealed a median NEDA of 89 weeks (CI: 79,96–98,04) for PPMS and 154 weeks (CI: 103,32–204,68) for RRMS. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0,035). <h3>Conclusion and Relevance</h3> These findings align with existing clinical trial data, showing better responses in RRMS compared to PPMS. The inflammatory and less progressive nature of RRMS may explain its better response to immunomodulatory therapies. This calls for personalised treatment approaches in MS management. Future research should focus on optimising treatment strategies for PPMS and further validating these results across diverse patient populations. <h3>References and/or Acknowledgements</h3> <h3>Conflict of Interest</h3> No conflict of interest