Safety of Fingolimod in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Switched from Natalizumab: Results from TRANSITION―A 2-Year, Multicenter, Observational, Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple sclerosis (MS) patients receiving natalizumab and who are at risk of developing progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) often switch to other high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies including fingolimod as a risk mitigation strategy, which could impact treatment safety and effectiveness. The TRANSITION study aimed to evaluate the safety of fingolimod over two years in patients with MS after switching from natalizumab in a real-world setting. The safety and effectiveness were assessed by monitoring serious and other adverse events (SAEs, AEs). We assessed effectiveness by recording relapses, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores, and MRI activity. Of 637 patients enrolled, 505 completed the study (mean age, 42 years). Overall, 72.8% and 12.7% experienced AEs and SAEs respectively. The most common AEs were fatigue, headache, and urinary tract infection; no cases of PML were observed. Fingolimod treatment resulted in low disease activity. Patients with ≤8 weeks washout period had a markedly lower risk of relapses (4.5%) than those with >8 weeks (51.4%). In patients switching from natalizumab to fingolimod, no new safety signals with overall low relapse activity were observed in patients with washout latencies of ≤8 weeks before fingolimod initiation. Fingolimod was found to be safe and effective in patients transitioning from natalizumab.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".