Drugs & Therapy Perspectives

, Volume 35, Issue 12, pp 627–634 | Cite as

Adverse events and monitoring requirements associated with monoclonal antibody therapy in patients with multiple sclerosis

  • Yara Dadalti FragosoEmail author
Therapy in Practice


Multiple sclerosis (MS) is treated with a variety of immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive drugs. Among the most potent therapeutic options are monoclonal antibodies (MAbs). So far, the MAbs natalizumab, alemtuzumab, and ocrelizumab have been approved for MS treatment. While their efficacy is indisputable, these drugs have safety issues not seen with previous MS drugs. MAbs are the ideal class of treatment for many patients with MS, but neurologists prescribing these MAbs need to be aware of their potential risks and monitor patients closely. Although rare, adverse events associated with MAbs may be fatal; opportunistic infections, tumors, and infusion-related events require planning and monitoring of patients before, during, and after MAb therapy. This review summarizes the type and management of adverse events associated with MAb treatment in patients with MS, and emphasizes the importance of evidence-based knowledge for all neurologists involved in MS therapy.


Compliance with ethical standards


No private or public funding was provided for this review.

Conflict of interest

The author, Yara Dadalti Fragoso, has no conflicts of interest to declare.


  1. 1.
    Vargas DL, Tyor WR. Update on disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis. J Investig Med. 2017;65(5):883–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hartung DM. Economics and cost-effectiveness of multiple sclerosis therapies in the USA. Neurotherapeutics. 2017;14(4):1018–26.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Merkel B, Butzkueven H, Traboulsee AL, et al. Timing of high-efficacy therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review. Autoimmun Rev. 2017;16(6):658–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    McGinley MP, Moss BP, Cohen JA. Safety of monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2017;16(1):89–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akaishi T, Nakashima I. Efficiency of antibody therapy in demyelinating diseases. Int Immunol. 2017;29(7):327–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pucci E, Giuliani G, Solari A, et al. Natalizumab for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;10:CD007621.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Riera R, Porfírio GJ, Torloni MR. Alemtuzumab for multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;4:CD011203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McCool R, Wilson K, Arber M, et al. Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing ocrelizumab with other treatments for relapsing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;29:55–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shirley M. Daclizumab: a review in relapsing multiple sclerosis. Drugs. 2017;77(4):447–58.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Judson MA, Elicker BM, Colby TV, et al. The development of sarcoidosis in patients receiving daclizumab: a case series from multiple clinical trials. Respir Med. 2019;149:23–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Williams T, Chataway J. Immune-mediated encephalitis with daclizumab: the final nail. Mult Scler. 2019;25(5):753–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Engelhardt B, Kappos L. Natalizumab: targeting α4-integrins in multiple sclerosis. Neurodegener Dis. 2008;5(1):16–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chataway J, Miller DH. Natalizumab therapy for multiple sclerosis. Neurotherapeutics. 2013;10(1):19–28.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Balasa RI, Simu M, Voidazan S, et al. Natalizumab changes the peripheral profile of the Th17 panel in MS patients: new mechanisms of action. CNS Neurol Disord Drug Targets. 2017;16(9):1018–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Park SC, Jeen YT. Anti-integrin therapy for inflammatory bowel disease. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24(17):1868–80.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Namey M, Halper J, O’leary S, et al. Best practices in multiple sclerosis: infusion reactions versus hypersensitivity associated with biologic therapies. J Infus Nurs. 2010;33(2):98–111.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ruck T, Bittner S, Wiendl H, et al. Alemtuzumab in multiple sclerosis: mechanism of action and beyond. Int J Mol Sci. 2015;16(7):16414–39.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Laribi K, Lemaire P, Sandrini J, et al. Advances in the understanding and management of T-cell prolymphocytic leukemia. Oncotarget. 2017;8(61):104664–86.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhao Y, Su H, Shen X, et al. The immunological function of CD52 and its targeting in organ transplantation. Inflamm Res. 2017;66(7):571–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martin F, Chan AC. B cell immunobiology in disease: evolving concepts from the clinic. Annu Rev Immunol. 2006;24:467–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mayer L, Kappos L, Racke MK, et al. Ocrelizumab infusion experience in patients with relapsing and primary progressive multiple sclerosis: results from the phase 3 randomized OPERA I, OPERA II, and ORATORIO studies. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;30:236–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Berger JR, Koralnik IJ. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy and natalizumab—unforeseen consequences. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(4):414–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nicholas JA, Racke MK, Imitola J, et al. First-line natalizumab in multiple sclerosis: rationale, patient selection, benefits and risks. Ther Adv Chronic Dis. 2014;5(2):62–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhovtis Ryerson L, Frohman TC, Foley J, et al. Extended interval dosing of natalizumab in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2016;87(8):885–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shenoy ES, Mylonakis E, Hurtado RM, et al. Natalizumab and HSV meningitis. J Neurovirol. 2011;17(3):288–90.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sharma K, Ballham SA, Inglis KE, et al. Does natalizumab treatment increase the risk of herpes simplex encephalitis in multiple sclerosis? Case and discussion. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2013;2(4):385–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fragoso YD, Brooks JB, Gomes S, et al. Report of three cases of herpes zoster during treatment with natalizumab. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2013;19(4):280–1.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gutwinski S, Erbe S, Münch C, et al. Severe cutaneous Candida infection during natalizumab therapy in multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 2010;74(6):521–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kobeleva X, Wegner F, Brunotte I, et al. Varicella zoster-associated retinal and central nervous system vasculitis in a patient with multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab. J Neuroinflamm. 2014;11:19.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Valenzuela RM, Pula JH, Garwacki D, et al. Cryptococcal meningitis in a multiple sclerosis patient taking natalizumab. J Neurol Sci. 2014;340(1–2):109–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hradilek P, Zeman D, Tudik I, et al. Asymptomatic lung disease caused by Mycobacterium kansasii as an opportunistic infection in a patient treated with natalizumab for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2014;20(5):639–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Durmus B, Van Goethem J, Vercruyssen A, et al. Cerebral abscess in a multiple sclerosis patient during treatment with natalizumab. Acta Neurol Belg. 2019. (Epub 2019).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lima MR, Farias LABG, da Ponte MF, et al. Self-limited cytomegalovirus infection during natalizumab treatment for multiple sclerosis. Eur J Case Rep Intern Med. 2019;6(2):001046.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Holmoy T, von der Lippe H, Leegaard TM. Listeria monocytogenes infection associated with alemtuzumab: a case for better preventive strategies. BMC Neurol. 2017;17(1):65.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Clerico M, De Mercanti S, Artusi CA, et al. Active CMV infection in two patients with multiple sclerosis treated with alemtuzumab. Mult Scler. 2017;23(6):874–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pappolla A, Midaglia L, Boix Rodríguez CP, et al. Simultaneous CMV and Listeria infection following alemtuzumab treatment for multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 2019;92(6):296–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Russo CV, Saccà F, Paternoster M, et al. Post-mortem diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis after alemtuzumab treatment for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2019. (Epub 2019).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Coles AJ, Twyman CL, Arnold DL, et al. CARE-MS II investigators. Alemtuzumab for patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis after disease-modifying therapy: a randomised controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2012;380(9856):1829–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sheikh-Taha M, Corman LC. Pulmonary Nocardia beijingensis infection associated with the use of alemtuzumab in a patient with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2017;23(6):872–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Penkert H, Delbridge C, Wantia N, et al. Fulminant central nervous system nocardiosis in a patient treated with alemtuzumab for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. JAMA Neurol. 2016;73(6):757–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ciardi MR, Iannetta M, Zingaropoli MA, et al. Reactivation of hepatitis B virus with immune-escape mutations after ocrelizumab treatment for multiple sclerosis. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2018;6(1):ofy356.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Nicolini LA, Canepa P, Caligiuri P, et al. Fulminant hepatitis associated with echovirus 25 during treatment with ocrelizumab for multiple sclerosis. JAMA Neurol. 2019;76(7):866–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hauser SL, Bar-Or A, Comi G, et al. OPERA I and OPERA II clinical investigators. Ocrelizumab versus interferon beta-1a in relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(3):221–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
  45. 45.
    Kelm RC, Hagstrom EL, Mathieu RJ, et al. Melanoma subsequent to natalizumab exposure: a report from the RADAR (Research on Adverse Drug events And Reports) program. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80(3):820–1.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nixon M, Menger RP, Kalakoti P, et al. Natalizumab-associated primary central nervous system lymphoma. World Neurosurg. 2018;109:152–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Fragoso YD, Brooks JBB, Reghin Neto M. The unexpected finding of a hemangioblastoma on the cerebellum of a patient undergoing treatment with natalizumab for multiple sclerosis. Iran J Neurol. 2017;16(2):96–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kantorova E, Bittsanský M, Sivak S, et al. Anaplastic astrocytoma mimicking progressive multifocal leucoencephalopathy: a case report and review of the overlapping syndromes. BMC Cancer. 2017;17(1):424.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gandoglia I, Ivaldi F, Carrega P, et al. In vitro VLA-4 blockade results in an impaired NK cell-mediated immune surveillance against melanoma. Immunol Lett. 2017;181:109–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Lebrun C, Rocher F. Cancer risk in patients with multiple sclerosis: potential impact of disease-modifying drugs. CNS Drugs. 2018;32(10):939–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Guarnera C, Bramanti P, Mazzon E. Alemtuzumab: a review of efficacy and risks in the treatment of relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2017;13:871–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Fragoso YD, Alves-Leon SV, Arruda WO, et al. Natalizumab adverse events are rare in patients with multiple sclerosis. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2013;71(3):137–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Prosperini L, Kinkel RP, Miravalle AA, et al. Post-natalizumab disease reactivation in multiple sclerosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2019;12:1756286419837809.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Gonzalez-Suarez I, Rodríguez de Antonio L, Orviz A, et al. Catastrophic outcome of patients with a rebound after natalizumab treatment discontinuation. Brain Behav. 2017;7(4):e00671.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Frau J, Coghe G, Lorefice L, et al. Efficacy and safety of alemtuzumab in a real-life cohort of patients with multiple sclerosis. J Neurol. 2019;266(6):1405–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Caon C, Namey M, Meyer C, et al. Prevention and management of infusion-associated reactions in the comparison of alemtuzumab and Rebif® efficacy in multiple sclerosis (CARE-MS) program. Int J MS Care. 2015;17(4):191–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Myro AZ, Bjerke G, Zarnovicky S, et al. Diffuse alveolar hemorrhage during alemtuzumab infusion in a patient with multiple sclerosis: a case report. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. 2018;19(1):75.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Azevedo CJ, Kutz C, Dix A, et al. Intracerebral haemorrhage during alemtuzumab administration. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(4):329–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Maniscalco GT, Cerillo I, Servillo G, et al. Early neutropenia with thrombocytopenia following alemtuzumab treatment for multiple sclerosis: case report and review of literature. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2018;175:134–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
  61. 61.
    Frey N. Cytokine release syndrome: who is at risk and how to treat. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol. 2017;30(4):336–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Devonshire V, Phillips R, Wass H, et al. Monitoring and management of autoimmunity in multiple sclerosis patients treated with alemtuzumab: practical recommendations. J Neurol. 2018;265(11):2494–505.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lambert C, Dubois B, Dive D, et al. Management of immune thrombocytopenia in multiple sclerosis patients treated with alemtuzumab: a Belgian consensus. Acta Neurol Belg. 2018;118(1):7–11.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Phelps R, Winston JA, Wynn D, et al. Incidence, management, and outcomes of autoimmune nephropathies following alemtuzumab treatment in patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2019;25(9):1273–88.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Aouad P, Yiannikas C, Fernando SL, et al. A case of autoimmune myositis after treatment with alemtuzumab for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin. 2018;4(4):2055217318819012.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Giarola B, Massey J, Barnett Y, et al. Autoimmune encephalitis following alemtuzumab treatment of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;28:31–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Pisa M, Della Valle P, Coluccia A, et al. Acquired haemophilia A as a secondary autoimmune disease after alemtuzumab treatment in multiple sclerosis: a case report. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;27:403–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Richter S, Wagner B, Celius EG. Two cases of diabetes mellitus type 1 after alemtuzumab treatment for multiple sclerosis: another probable secondary autoimmune disease. J Neurol. 2019;266(5):1270–1.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Hoffman BM, Zeid NA, Alam U, et al. Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome associated with alemtuzumab administration. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;27:131–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Whiteside D, Barth S, Datta A, et al. Pneumonitis secondary to alemtuzumab in a patient with multiple sclerosis: anon-infectious cause of breathlessness. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2018;22:139–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Ruck T, Pfeuffer S, Schulte-Mecklenbeck A, et al. Vitiligo after alemtuzumab treatment: secondary autoimmunity is not all about B cells. Neurology. 2018;91(24):e2233–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Alcala C, Pzere-Miralles F, Gascon F, et al. Recurrent and universal alopecia areata following alemtuzumab treatment in multiple sclerosis: a secondary autoimmune disease. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;27:406–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Jones JL, Thompson SA, Loh P, et al. Human autoimmunity after lymphocyte depletion is caused by homeostatic T-cell proliferation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:20200–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Baker D, Herrod SS, Alvarez-Gonzalez C, et al. Interpreting lymphocyte reconstitution data from the pivotal phase 3 trials of alemtuzumab. JAMA Neurol. 2017;74:961–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Montalban X, Hauser SL, Kappos L, et al. ORATORIO clinical investigators. Ocrelizumab versus placebo in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(3):209–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Conte WL, Arndt N, Cipriani VP, et al. Reduction in ocrelizumab-induced infusion reactions by a modified premedication protocol. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;27:397–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Cohen BA. Late-onset neutropenia following ocrelizumab therapy for multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 2019;92(9):435–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Kane SV, Acquah LA. Placental transport of immunoglobulins: a clinical review for gastroenterologists who prescribe therapeutic monoclonal antibodies to women during conception and pregnancy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(1):228–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Simister NE. Placental transport of immunoglobulin G. Vaccine. 2003;21(24):3365–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Fragoso YD, Adoni T, Brooks JBB, et al. Practical evidence-based recommendations for patients with multiple sclerosis who want to have children. Neurol Ther. 2018;7(2):207–32.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Fragoso YD. Is it correct for a woman with multiple sclerosis to forgo medication because she may become pregnant? Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2013;71(10):826–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Proschmann U, Thomas K, Thiel S, et al. Natalizumab during pregnancy and lactation. Mult Scler. 2018;24(12):1627–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Baker TE, Cooper SD, Kessler L, Hale TW. Transfer of natalizumab into breast milk in a mother with multiple sclerosis. J Hum Lact. 2015;31(2):233–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Arastehfar A, Wickes BL, Ilkit M, et al. Identification of mycoses in developing countries. J Fungi (Basel). 2019;5(4):E90.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Teixeira AR, Hecht MM, Guimaro MC, et al. Pathogenesis of Chagas’ disease: parasite persistence and autoimmunity. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2011;24(3):592–630.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Perez-Mazliah D, Langhorne J. CD4 T-cell subsets in malaria: TH1/TH2 revisited. Front Immunol. 2015;5:671.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Faubert G. Immune response to Giardia duodenalis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2000;13(1):35–54.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Weatherhead J, Cortés AA, Sandoval C, et al. Comparison of cytokine responses in Ecuadorian children infected with Giardia, Ascaris, or both parasites. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017;96(6):1394–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Fragoso YD, Adoni T, Anacleto A, et al. How do we manage and treat a patient with multiple sclerosis at risk of tuberculosis? Expert Rev Neurother. 2014;14(11):1251–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Mabbott NA. The influence of parasite infections on host immunity to co-infection with other pathogens. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2579.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Schramm G, Haas H. Th2 immune response against Schistosoma mansoni infection. Microbes Infect. 2010;12(12–13):881–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Salazar JC, Cruz AR, Pope CD, et al. Treponema pallidum elicits innate and adaptive cellular immune responses in skin and blood during secondary syphilis: a flow-cytometric analysis. J Infect Dis. 2007;195(6):879–87.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Alwarawrah Y, Kiernan K, MacIver NJ. Changes in nutritional status impact immune cell metabolism and function. Front Immunol. 2018;9:1055.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    West-Eberhard MJ. Nutrition, the visceral immune system, and the evolutionary origins of pathogenic obesity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2019;116(3):723–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Calder PC. Feeding the immune system. Proc Nutr Soc. 2013;72(3):299–309.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Gold R, Wolinsky JS, Amato MP, et al. Evolving expectations around early management of multiple sclerosis. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2010;3(6):351–67.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Stangel M, Penner IK, Kallmann BA, et al. Towards the implementation of ‘no evidence of disease activity’ in multiple sclerosis treatment: the multiple sclerosis decision model. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2015;8(1):3–13.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Hegen H, Bsteh G, Berger T. ‘No evidence of disease activity’: is it an appropriate surrogate in multiple sclerosis? Eur J Neurol. 2018;25(9):1107-e101.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Parks NE, Flanagan EP, Lucchinetti CF, et al. NEDA treatment target? No evident disease activity as an actionable outcome in practice. J Neurol Sci. 2017;383:31–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Soleimani B, Murray K, Hunt D. Established and emerging immunological complications of biological therapeutics in multiple sclerosis. Drug Saf. 2019;42(8):941–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    De Giglio L, Grimaldi AE, Fubelli F, et al. Advances in preventing adverse events during monoclonal antibody management of multiple sclerosis. Expert Rev Neurother. 2019;19(5):417–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Della Rosa S, Sen F. Health topics on Facebook groups: content analysis of posts in multiple sclerosis communities. Interact J Med Res. 2019;8(1):e10146.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Eijkholt M, Sparling A. Health, honesty and happiness: authenticity and anonymity in social media participation of individuals with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;27:121–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Fragoso YD. Why some of us do not like the expression “no evidence of disease activity” (NEDA) in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2015;4(4):383–4.Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Ziemssen T, Thomas K. Alemtuzumab in the long-term treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: an update on the clinical trial evidence and data from the real world. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2017;10(10):343–59.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Carrá A, Macías Islas MA, Tarulla A, et al. Biological and nonbiological complex drugs for multiple sclerosis in Latin America: regulations and risk management. Expert Rev Neurother. 2015;15(6):597–600.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Steinberg J, Fragoso YD, Duran Quiroz JC, et al. Practical issues concerning the approval and use of biosimilar drugs for the treatment of multiple sclerosis in Latin America. Neurol Ther. 2019 (Epub 2019).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universidade Metropolitana de SantosSantosBrazil
  2. 2.MS & Headache ResearchSantosBrazil

Personalised recommendations