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′.

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction Since the onset of the novel coronavirus pandemic, several neurological complications secondary to SARS‐CoV‐2 infection have been reported, affecting central nervous system, peripheral nervous system and neuromuscular junction. Case Report We present the case of a 77‐year‐old man who developed bulbar myasthenia gravis (MG) eight weeks after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. The search for serum antibodies against the acetylcholine receptor, the muscle‐specific tyrosine kinase (MuSK), and the low‐density lipoprotein receptor‐related protein 4 antibodies, performed by radioimmunoassay (RIA), resulted negative, while anti‐MuSK antibodies were detected by cell‐based assay (CBA). The patient was treated with pyridostigmine (60 mg four times a day) with unsatisfactory clinical response, followed by immunosuppressive therapy (azathioprine 1.5 mg/kg/day) with improvement of MG symptoms after two months of treatment. Discussion Several viral diseases have been described as associated with the onset of MG, although the underlying mechanisms are not yet fully understood. Similarly, a growing number of scientific reports suggest a correlation between SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and autoimmune diseases. The interest of our case lies in the timing of the MG onset (after two months from infection), together with the unusual late onset of anti‐MuSK MG. These elements suggest that coronavirus infection may act as a trigger of the disease. We confirm the importance of CBA in the serological diagnosis of RIA‐negative MG.

Extending the natalizumab interval after the 24th administration could reduce the risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). The objective is to evaluate the noninferiority of the efficacy of an extended interval dosing (EID) compared with the standard interval dosing (SID) of natalizumab. It is an observational, multicenter (14 Italian centers), retrospective cohort study, starting from the 24th natalizumab infusion to the loss of follow-up or 2 years after baseline. Patients were grouped in 2 categories according to the mean number of weeks between doses: < 5 weeks, SID; ≥ 5 weeks, EID. Three hundred and sixty patients were enrolled. Median dose interval (MDI) following 24th infusion was 4.7 weeks, with a bimodal distribution (modes at 4 and 6 weeks). Two hundred and sixteen patients were in the SID group (MDI = 4.3 weeks) and 144 in the EID group (MDI 6.2 weeks). Annualized relapse rate was 0.060 (95% CI = 0.033-0.087) in the SID group and 0.039 (95% CI = 0.017-0.063) in the EID group. The non-inferiority of EID versus SID was satisfied. In conclusion, there is no evidence of a reduced efficacy of natalizumab in an EID setting. This observation confirms previous results and together with the emerging evidence of a reduced risk of PML associated to an EID, supports the need of a randomized study to assess the need to change the standard of the natalizumab dosing schedule.