Objective This study was undertaken to assess the impact of immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory therapies on the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). Methods We retrospectively collected data of PwMS with suspected or confirmed COVID‐19. All the patients had complete follow‐up to death or recovery. Severe COVID‐19 was defined by a 3‐level variable: mild disease not requiring hospitalization versus pneumonia or hospitalization versus intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death. We evaluated baseline characteristics and MS therapies associated with severe COVID‐19 by multivariate and propensity score (PS)‐weighted ordinal logistic models. Sensitivity analyses were run to confirm the results. Results Of 844 PwMS with suspected (n = 565) or confirmed (n = 279) COVID‐19, 13 (1.54%) died; 11 of them were in a progressive MS phase, and 8 were without any therapy. Thirty‐eight (4.5%) were admitted to an ICU; 99 (11.7%) had radiologically documented pneumonia; 96 (11.4%) were hospitalized. After adjusting for region, age, sex, progressive MS course, Expanded Disability Status Scale, disease duration, body mass index, comorbidities, and recent methylprednisolone use, therapy with an anti‐CD20 agent (ocrelizumab or rituximab) was significantly associated (odds ratio [OR] = 2.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18–4.74, p = 0.015) with increased risk of severe COVID‐19. Recent use (<1 month) of methylprednisolone was also associated with a worse outcome (OR = 5.24, 95% CI = 2.20–12.53, p = 0.001). Results were confirmed by the PS‐weighted analysis and by all the sensitivity analyses. Interpretation This study showed an acceptable level of safety of therapies with a broad array of mechanisms of action. However, some specific elements of risk emerged. These will need to be considered while the COVID‐19 pandemic persists. ANN NEUROL 2021;89:780–789

Background In patients with Multiple Sclerosis (pwMS) disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) affects immune response to antigens. Therefore, post-vaccination serological assessments are needed to evaluate the effect of the vaccine on SARS-CoV-2 antibody response. Methods We designed a prospective multicenter cohort study enrolling pwMS who were scheduled for SARS-Cov-2 vaccination with mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2, Pfizer/BioNTech,Inc or mRNA-1273, Moderna Tx,Inc). A blood collection before the first vaccine dose and 4 weeks after the second dose was planned, with a centralized serological assessment (electrochemiluminescence immunoassay, ECLIA, Roche-Diagnostics). The log-transform of the antibody levels was analyzed by multivariable linear regression. Findings 780 pwMS (76% BNT162b2 and 24% mRNA-1273) had pre- and 4-week post-vaccination blood assessments. 87 (11·2%) were untreated, 154 (19·7%) on ocrelizumab, 25 (3·2%) on rituximab, 85 (10·9%) on fingolimod, 25 (3·2%) on cladribine and 404 (51·7%) on other DMTs. 677 patients (86·8%) had detectable post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. At multivariable analysis, the antibody levels of patients on ocrelizumab (201-fold decrease (95%CI=128–317), p < 0·001), fingolimod (26-fold decrease (95%CI=16–42), p < 0·001) and rituximab (20-fold decrease (95%CI=10–43), p < 0·001) were significantly reduced as compared to untreated patients. Vaccination with mRNA-1273 resulted in a systematically 3·25-fold higher antibody level (95%CI=2·46–4·27) than with the BNT162b2 vaccine ( p < 0·001). The antibody levels on anti-CD20 therapies correlated to the time since last infusion, and rituximab had longer intervals (mean=386 days) than ocrelizumab patients (mean=129 days). Interpretation In pwMS, anti-CD20 treatment and fingolimod led to a reduced humoral response to mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. As mRNA-1273 elicits 3·25-higher antibody levels than BNT162b2, this vaccine may be preferentially considered for patients under anti-CD20 treatment or fingolimod. Combining our data with those on the cellular immune response to vaccines, and including clinical follow-up, will contribute to better define the most appropriate SARS-CoV-2 vaccine strategies in the context of DMTs and MS. Funding FISM[2021/Special-Multi/001]; Italian Ministry of Health‘Progetto Z844A 5 × 1000′.

We evaluated the effect of DMTs on Covid‐19 severity in patients with MS, with a pooled‐analysis of two large cohorts from Italy and France. The association of baseline characteristics and DMTs with Covid‐19 severity was assessed by multivariate ordinal‐logistic models and pooled by a fixed‐effect meta‐analysis. 1066 patients with MS from Italy and 721 from France were included. In the multivariate model, anti‐CD20 therapies were significantly associated (OR = 2.05, 95%CI = 1.39–3.02, p < 0.001) with Covid‐19 severity, whereas interferon indicated a decreased risk (OR = 0.42, 95%CI = 0.18–0.99, p = 0.047). This pooled‐analysis confirms an increased risk of severe Covid‐19 in patients on anti‐CD20 therapies and supports the protective role of interferon.

No abstract

The term hereditary spastic paraplegia (HSP) embraces a clinically and genetically heterogeneous group of neurodegenerative diseases characterized by progressive spasticity and weakness of the lower limbs. There currently exist no specific therapies for HSP, and treatment is exclusively symptomatic, aimed at reducing muscle spasticity, and improving strength and gait. The authors set out to perform a comprehensive systematic review of the available scientific literature on the treatment of HSP, applying Cochrane Collaboration methods. The Google Scholar, PubMed and Scopus electronic databases were searched to find relevant randomized control trials (RCTs) and open-label interventional studies, prospective, and retrospective observational studies of supplements, medications, and physical therapy, as well as case reports and case series. Two authors independently analyzed 27 articles selected on the basis of a series of inclusion criteria. Applying a best-evidence synthesis approach, they evaluated these articles for methodological quality. A standardized scoring system was used to obtain interrater assessments. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. The 27 articles focused on pharmacological treatment (n = 17 articles), physical therapy (n = 5), surgical treatment (n = 5). The drugs used in the 17 articles on pharmacological therapy were: gabapentin, progabide, dalfampridine, botulinum toxin, L-Dopa, cholesterol-lowering drugs, betaine, and folinic acid. Gabapentin, progabide, dalfampridine, and botulinum toxin were used as antispastic agents; the study evaluating gabapentin efficacy was well-designed, but failed to demonstrate any significant improvement. L-Dopa, cholesterol-lowering drugs, betaine, and folinic acid were only used in specific HSP subtypes. Two of the three studies evaluating cholesterol-lowering drugs (in SPG5 patients) were well-designed and showed a significant reduction of specific serum biomarkers (oxysterols), but clinical outcomes were not evaluated. The articles focusing on physical treatment and surgical therapy were found to be of low/medium quality and, accordingly, failed to clarify the role of these approaches in HSP. Despite recent advances in understanding of the pathogenesis of HSP and the possibility, in several centers, of obtaining more precise and rapid molecular diagnoses, there is still no adequate evidence base for recommending the various published therapies. Well-designed RCTs are needed to evaluate the efficacy of both symptomatic and pathogenetic treatments.