This retrospective single-center observational study assessed the clinical effectiveness and tolerability of a nonmedical switch from originator MabThera (rituximab) to the biosimilar Truxima in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Fifty patients who had received at least two infusions of the originator product were followed for two years after switching. The report is a medRxiv preprint and has not undergone peer review.
Investigators conducted a single-center retrospective cohort analysis of 50 pwMS switched from originator to biosimilar rituximab. Inclusion required at least two prior infusions of the originator product before switching. Follow-up duration reported was two years post-switch. The study received institutional approval from the King Saud Medical City Institutional Review Board (approval number H1RI-04-Apr23-04). Patient informed consent was not required because data were extracted from routine clinical records without new patient contact. The authors note that rituximab is used off-label in MS, which introduces extrapolation considerations when assessing biosimilar substitution.
Annualized relapse rate (ARR) was calculated for three periods: prerituximab baseline, during treatment with the originator product, and during treatment with the biosimilar after switching. Reported ARRs were:
A statistical comparison between the originator and biosimilar periods yielded p = 0.367, indicating no significant difference in ARR between the two treatment periods in this cohort.
A paired imaging analysis was reported for a subset of patients (n = 29). The proportion of patients with active MRI scans declined across the three sequential periods analyzed: 50.0%, 34.5%, and 17.2%. Cochran’s Q test for the trend across periods produced p = 0.040, indicating a statistically significant overall decline in imaging activity over time. Pairwise comparison between the originator and biosimilar treatment periods using McNemar’s test showed p = 0.227, indicating no statistically significant difference in active scan proportions between the originator and biosimilar periods in the paired subset.
The authors reported that peripheral B-cell depletion deepened progressively over the observation periods. The paper presents this as an immunological correlate to treatment effect during successive treatment phases, consistent with the mechanism of action of rituximab. Specific quantitative B-cell values or timing details beyond the statement that depletion deepened were not reported in the abstract.
Tolerability outcomes described in the report indicate that all patients remained on the biosimilar through the end of the two-year follow-up period. No discontinuations of Truxima were reported in the cohort. The authors interpret continued treatment adherence and absence of reported discontinuations as evidence of acceptable tolerability following nonmedical switching in this population.
Key limitations implicit in the study design include its single-center, retrospective observational nature and relatively small sample size, which may limit generalizability. The report emphasizes that rituximab is used off-label in MS and that biosimilar extrapolation to off-label indications warrants clinical scrutiny.
Competing interests were disclosed: one author reported receipt of speaker/advisory fees or travel support from multiple pharmaceutical companies; the other authors declared no conflicts. The study is presented as a preprint and has not been peer reviewed. The authors state that the supporting dataset is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and subject to institutional data governance approval.
In this tertiary-center cohort of 50 pwMS observed for two years after a nonmedical switch from MabThera to Truxima, clinical relapse rates and radiological activity were comparable between originator and biosimilar treatment periods, with progressive B-cell depletion and full retention on the biosimilar. The authors conclude that nonmedical switching to the biosimilar was associated with comparable effectiveness and tolerability in this cohort. As this report is a preprint, findings should be interpreted in context and not used alone to guide clinical practice.