Study author Laure Michel highlighted the need for ongoing evaluation of MS therapies to ensure their benefits outweigh risks, particularly given the high costs and potential side effects.

Despite the promising results for ofatumumab, a study published in Neurology found no difference in confirmed disability progression between anti-CD20-treated and untreated patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS).

New research presented at the ECTRIMS 2024 conference indicates that starting treatment with the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody ofatumumab significantly reduces the risk of long-term disability accumulation in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients compared to beginning treatment with an immunomodulator like teriflunomide.

The study found that the beneficial effects of ofatumumab in reducing disability accumulation were sustained for up to six years, with no increased risk of adverse events reported.

Dr. Sifat Sharmin emphasized that early treatment with ofatumumab can lower the risk of progressing to higher disability levels, with reductions in progression rates by up to 97% in moderate disability cases.

The research involved 1,184 participants with an average age of 56, all of whom had not taken MS medications in the two years prior to the study.

The study specifically analyzed data from 282 patients with pediatric-onset MS, comparing those who began treatment between ages 12-17 and those who started between ages 20-22.

Dr. Amit Bar-Or presented findings showing that delaying ofatumumab treatment fails to compensate for the early control benefits in treatment-naive patients.

For treatment-naive patients, the rates of confirmed disability worsening were 16.61% for those on continuous ofatumumab compared to 23.74% for those receiving delayed treatment.

The study advocates for early access to high-efficacy therapies like ocrelizumab, rituximab, or natalizumab for children with MS to improve long-term outcomes.

The early treatment group demonstrated a 0.57-point lower increase in EDSS scores between ages 23 and 27, with benefits persisting over a median follow-up of 10.8 years.

Several authors associated with the study have disclosed ties to the pharmaceutical industry, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest.