Simulated treatment comparison of efficacy outcomes for ofatumumab in ASCLEPIOS I/II versus ocrelizumab in OPERA I/II for the treatment of patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis


      • Two newer MS therapies were compared using simulated treatment comparisons.
      • ASCLEPIOS I/II patient-level data were used to adjust for cross-trial differences.
      • Ofatumumab significantly lowered the annualized relapse rate versus ocrelizumab.



      Ofatumumab is a subcutaneously administered anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (MoAb) therapy that has been evaluated in two identically designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), ASCLEPIOS I (NCT02792218) and ASCLEPIOS II (NCT02792231), in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). Ocrelizumab is another anti-CD20 MoAb therapy, administered intravenously, that has been evaluated in two identically designed RCTs, OPERA I (NCT01247324) and OPERA II (NCT01412333) in RMS. Given the absence of published RCTs with head-to-head comparisons between these MoAbs, this study assessed the indirect comparative efficacy of ofatumumab and ocrelizumab.


      Given the availability of individual patient data for ASCLEPIOS I/II and summary-level data for OPERA I/II, simulated treatment comparisons were used to assess the comparative efficacy of ofatumumab versus ocrelizumab while adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics between trials. Comparative efficacy was estimated for the proportion of patients with 3- and 6-month confirmed disability progression (CDP) and for annualized relapse rate (ARR). Exploratory analyses were conducted for the outcome of no evidence of disease activity based on three parameters (NEDA-3) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes (proportion of patients with gadolinium-enhancing T1 lesions and brain volume change).


      Although comparative results were not significant for 3-month CDP (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.90 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57−1.42]) or 6-month CDP (HR: 0.84 [95% CI: 0.47−1.49]), ofatumumab showed a significant improvement in ARR (rate ratio: 0.60 [95% CI: 0.43−0.84]) compared with ocrelizumab. Significantly favorable results were also associated with ofatumumab for NEDA-3 and MRI outcomes.


      Ofatumumab was associated with more favorable efficacy results compared with ocrelizumab for clinical, NEDA-3, and MRI outcomes.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Austin P.C.
        Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples.
        Stat. Med. 2009; 28: 3083-3107
        • Chau I.
        • Ayers D.
        • Goring S.
        • Cope S.
        • Korytowsky B.
        • Abraham P.
        Comparative effectiveness of nivolumab versus clinical practice for advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer.
        J. Comp. Eff. Res. 2019; 9: 103-114
      1. European Medicines Agency, 2015. Clinical investigation of medicinal products for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. (Accessed 26 May 2021).

      2. Genentech, I., 2017. Ocrevus (ocrelizumab) highlights of prescribing information. (Accessed 30 Jun 2021).

        • Giovannoni G.
        • Lang S.
        • Wolff R.
        • Duffy S.
        • Hyde R.
        • Kinter E.
        • Wakeford C.
        • Sormani M.P.
        • Kleijnen J.
        A systematic review and mixed treatment comparison of pharmaceutical interventions for multiple sclerosis.
        Neurol. Ther. 2020; 9: 359-374
        • Hauser S.L.
        • Bar-Or A.
        • Cohen J.A.
        • Comi G.
        • Correale J.
        • Coyle P.K.
        • Cross A.H.
        • de Seze J.
        • Leppert D.
        • Montalban X.
        • Selmaj K.
        • Wiendl H.
        • Kerloeguen C.
        • Willi R.
        • Li B.
        • Kakarieka A.
        • Tomic D.
        • Goodyear A.
        • Pingili R.
        • Häring D.A.
        • Ramanathan K.
        • Merschhemke M.
        • Kappos L.
        Ofatumumab versus teriflunomide in multiple sclerosis.
        N. Engl. J. Med. 2020; 383: 546-557
        • Hauser S.L.
        • Bar-Or A.
        • Cohen J.A.
        • Comi G.
        • Correale J.
        • Coyle P.K.
        • Cross A.H.
        • de Seze J.
        • Montalban X.
        • Selmaj K.
        • Wiendl H.
        • Willi R.
        • Li B.
        • Häring D.A.
        • Ramanathan K.
        • Merschhemke M.
        • Kappos L.
        Ofatumumab versus teriflunomide in relapsing multiple sclerosis: analysis of no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3) from the ASCLEPIOS I and II trials.
        Int. J. MS Care. 2020; 22: 85-86
        • Hauser S.L.
        • Bar-Or A.
        • Comi G.
        • Giovannoni G.
        • Hartung H.-.P.
        • Hemmer B.
        • Lublin F.
        • Montalban X.
        • Rammohan K.W.
        • Selmaj K.
        • Traboulsee A.
        • Wolinsky J.S.
        • Arnold D.L.
        • Klingelschmitt G.
        • Masterman D.
        • Fontoura P.
        • Belachew S.
        • Chin P.
        • Mairon N.
        • Garren H.
        • Kappos L.
        Ocrelizumab versus interferon beta-1a in relapsing multiple sclerosis.
        N. Engl. J. Med. 2017; 376: 221-234
        • Havrdová E.
        • Arnold D.L.
        • Bar-Or A.
        • Comi G.
        • Hartung H.-.P.
        • Kappos L.
        • Lublin F.
        • Selmaj K.
        • Traboulsee A.
        • Belachew S.
        • Bennett I.
        • Buffels R.
        • Garren H.
        • Han J.
        • Julian L.
        • Napieralski J.
        • Hauser S.L.
        • Giovannoni G.
        No evidence of disease activity (NEDA) analysis by epochs in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis treated with ocrelizumab vs interferon beta-1a.
        Mult. Scler. J. Exp. Transl. Clin. 2018; 42055217318760642
      3. Hoffmann-La Roche Limited, 2021. Ocrevus (ocrelizumab) product monograph. (Accessed 30 Jun 2021).

        • Liu Z.
        • Liao Q.
        • Wen H.
        • Zhang Y.
        Disease modifying therapies in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
        Autoimmun. Rev. 2021; 20102826
        • Lublin F.D.
        • Reingold S.C.
        • Cohen J.A.
        • Cutter G.R.
        • Sorensen P.S.
        • Thompson A.J.
        • Wolinsky J.S.
        • Balcer L.J.
        • Banwell B.
        • Barkhof F.
        • Bebo B.
        • Calabresi P.A.
        • Clanet M.
        • Comi G.
        • Fox R.J.
        • Freedman M.S.
        • Goodman A.D.
        • Inglese M.
        • Kappos L.
        • Kieseier B.C.
        • Lincoln J.A.
        • Lubetzki C.
        • Miller A.E.
        • Montalban X.
        • O'Connor P.W.
        • Petkau J.
        • Pozzilli C.
        • Rudick R.A.
        • Sormani M.P.
        • Stuve O.
        • Waubant E.
        • Polman C.H.
        Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: the 2013 revisions.
        Neurology. 2014; 83: 278-286
        • McCool R.
        • Wilson K.
        • Arber M.
        • Fleetwood K.
        • Toupin S.
        • Thom H.
        • Bennett I.
        • Edwards S.
        Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing ocrelizumab with other treatments for relapsing multiple sclerosis.
        Mult. Scler. Relat. Disord. 2019; 29: 55-61
      4. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 2020. Multiple sclerosis: hope through research. (Accessed 26 May 2021).

        • Nixon R.
        • Bergvall N.
        • Tomic D.
        • Sfikas N.
        • Cutter G.
        • Giovannoni G.
        No evidence of disease activity: indirect comparisons of oral therapies for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.
        Adv. Ther. 2014; 31: 1134-1154
      5. Novartis Ireland Limited, 2021. Kesimpta (ofatumumab) summary of product characteristics. (Accessed 30 Jun 2021).

      6. Novartis Pharmaceuticals, 2020. Kesimpta (ofatumumab) highlights of prescribing information. (Accessed 30 Jun 2021).

      7. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Australia Pty Limited, 2021. Kesimpta (ofatumumab) Australian product information. (Accessed 30 Jun 2021).

      8. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc., 2021. Kesimpta (ofatumumab) product monograph. (Accessed 30 Jun 2021).

        • Patterson K.
        • Prabhu V.
        • Xu R.
        • Li H.
        • Meng Y.
        • Zarabi N.
        • Zhong Y.
        • Batteson R.
        • Pellissier J.
        • Keefe S.
        Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for patients with advanced, unresectable, or metastatic urothelial cancer ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy.
        Eur. Urol. Oncol. 2019; 2: 565-571
      9. Phillippo, D., Ades, T., Dias, S., Palmer, S., Abrams, K.R., Welton, N., 2016. NICE DSU technical support document 18: methods for population-adjusted indirect comparisons in submission to NICE. Available from

        • Core Team R.
        R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.
        R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria2019
      10. Roche Products Pty Limited, 2021. Ocrevus (ocrelizumab) Australian product information. (Accessed 30 Jun 2021).

      11. Roche Registration GmbH, 2021. Ocrevus (ocrelizumab) summary of product characteristics. (Accessed 30 Jun 2021).

        • Samjoo I.A.
        • Worthington E.
        • Drudge C.
        • Zhao M.
        • Cameron C.
        • Häring D.A.
        • Stoneman D.
        • Klotz L.
        • Adlard N.
        Comparison of ofatumumab and other disease-modifying therapies for relapsing multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis.
        J. Comp. Eff. Res. 2020; 9: 1255-1274
        • Siddiqui M.K.
        • Khurana I.S.
        • Budhia S.
        • Hettle R.
        • Harty G.
        • Wong S.L.
        Systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of cladribine tablets versus alternative disease-modifying treatments for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.
        Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 2018; 34: 1361-1371
        • Tremblay G.
        • Daniele P.
        • Bell T.
        • Chan G.
        • Brown A.
        • Cappelleri J.C.
        Comparative effectiveness of glasdegib versus venetoclax combined with low-dose cytarabine in acute myeloid leukemia.
        J. Comp. Eff. Res. 2021; 10: 603-612
        • Tremblay G.
        • Tomaras D.
        • Strati E.
        • Forsythe A.
        Comparative effectiveness of remestemcel-l-rknd versus ruxolitinib in pediatric patients with steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease using simulated treatment comparisons.
        J. Health Econ. Outcomes Res. 2021; 8: 10-17