Ocrelizumab treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis after a suboptimal response to previous disease-modifying therapy: A nonrandomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) experience suboptimal disease control despite the use of disease-modifying therapy (DMT). OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab (OCR) in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) and suboptimal response to prior DMTs. METHODS: Patients with RRMS and suboptimal responses (one clinically reported relapse and/or lesion activity) after ⩾ 6 months on another DMT were enrolled. OCR 600 mg was given intravenously every 24 weeks. The primary outcome was no evidence of disease activity (NEDA), defined as the absence of protocol-defined relapse, confirmed disability progression (CDP), T1 Gd-enhancing lesions, and new/enlarging T2 lesions. RESULTS: = 576 (94.7%)). Over 96 weeks, 48.1% of mITT patients achieved NEDA, and most were free from protocol-defined relapse (89.6%), CDP (89.6%), and T1 Gd-enhancing lesions (95.5%); 59.5% had no new/enlarging T2 lesions. Safety observations were consistent with findings in the pivotal trials. CONCLUSION: Consistent efficacy of OCR on clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) disease activity measures and progression was shown in patients with RRMS and a suboptimal response to prior DMTs; no new safety signals were observed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".