Risk of COVID-19 infection and severe disease in MS patients on different disease-modifying therapies

Early use of high-efficacy therapies in multiple sclerosis in the United States: benefits, barriers, and strategies for encouraging adoption

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is characterized by progressive neuroinflammation and neurodegeneration from disease onset that, if left untreated, can result in the accumulation of irreversible neurological disability. Early intervention with high-efficacy therapies (HETs) is increasingly recognized as the best strategy to delay or mitigate disease progression from the earliest stages of the disease and to prevent long-term neurodegeneration. Although there is growing clinical and real-world evidence supporting early HET intervention, foregoing this strategy in favor of a traditional escalation approach prioritizing lower-efficacy disease-modifying therapies remains a common approach in clinical practice. This review explores potential health care professional- and patient-related barriers to the early use of HETs in patients with MS in the United States. Barriers can include regulatory and reimbursement restrictions; knowledge gaps and long-term safety concerns among health care professionals; and various individual, cultural, and societal factors affecting patients. Potential strategies for overcoming these barriers and encouraging early HET use are proposed.

COVID-19 Infection in Multiple Sclerosis Patients Treated with Rituximab Compared to Natalizumab and Healthy Controls: A Real-World Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection on patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) undergoing various immunomodulating therapies can vary. Individuals on B-cell therapy, such as rituximab, may be more susceptible to infection compared to those treated with natalizumab.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the incidence and severity of COVID-19 infection in patients receiving rituximab, natalizumab, and healthy controls.

METHODS

This retrospective multicentric study included data derived from a centralized MS registry of four centers in South India. Data of patients on rituximab and natalizumab recruited between 2020 February and 2022 December were extracted from the registry and analyzed. The outcomes studied were the occurrence of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, death, post-COVID-19 relapses, and post-vaccine relapses. These outcomes were compared between the treatment groups and the matched controls.

RESULTS

COVID-19 infection occurred in 49.1% (26/53) of those on rituximab, 19.2% (5/26) of those on natalizumab, and 11.5% (6/52) of healthy controls. In addition, 8/53 (15.1%) in the rituximab group and 1/26 (3.8%) in the natalizumab group were hospitalized. All 6/52 (11.5%) in the control group had mild infection, and none were hospitalized. No deaths occurred in any group. On statistical analysis, the occurrence of COVID-19 infection in the rituximab group was significantly higher when compared to natalizumab ( P = 0.0141) and healthy controls ( P < 0.001). Hospitalizations were significantly higher in the rituximab group when compared to healthy controls ( P < 0.006).

CONCLUSION

MS patients treated with rituximab were more likely to experience COVID-19 infection compared to those treated with natalizumab and healthy controls. Hospitalization was more frequently seen in patients treated with rituximab compared to healthy controls.

Coronavirus disease 2019 infection among working-aged people with multiple sclerosis and the impact of disease-modifying therapies

Background

The risk of coronavirus disease 2019 among people with multiple sclerosis with different disease-modifying therapies is not well established.

Objective

To investigate the occurrence of coronavirus disease 2019 and the remaining symptoms among people with multiple sclerosis and the associations with different disease-modifying therapies.

Methods

Individuals aged 20-50 listed in the Swedish Multiple Sclerosis Registry were invited to participate in a survey in 2021. Information on reported coronavirus disease 2019 infection and remaining symptoms were linked to individual-level register data. The risks by disease-modifying therapy of having coronavirus disease 2019 or having remaining symptoms were estimated with logistic regression.

Results

Of the 4393 participants, 1030 (23.4%) self-reported coronavirus disease 2019 (749 confirmed and 281 suspected). The observed odds for coronavirus disease 2019 did not differ by disease-modifying therapy (p-values <0.05). The majority reporting coronavirus disease 2019 had fully recovered (68.5%), 4.2% were currently/recently sick, and 27.0% had symptoms remaining after 2 months. The most frequently reported remaining symptoms involved one's sense of smell or taste (37.0%), fatigue (20.0%), and breathing (12.0%). No statistically significant associations were observed between having remaining symptoms and the disease-modifying therapy.

Conclusion

Despite the initial concerns of differing infection risks by MS treatments, we observed no differences in coronavirus disease 2019 occurrence or remaining symptoms among those who had coronavirus disease 2019. Nonetheless, exercising caution in interpreting our findings, it remains implicit that people with multiple sclerosis are particularly susceptible to infection and that lingering symptoms may persist beyond the initial infection.

Drugs Targeting CD20 in Multiple Sclerosis: Pharmacology, Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability

Currently, there are four monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target the cluster of differentiation (CD) 20 receptor available to treat multiple sclerosis (MS): rituximab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, and ublituximab. B-cell depletion therapy has changed the therapeutic landscape of MS through robust efficacy on clinical manifestations and MRI lesion activity, and the currently available anti-CD20 mAb therapies for use in MS are a cornerstone of highly effective disease-modifying treatment. Ocrelizumab is currently the only therapy with regulatory approval for primary progressive MS. There are currently few data regarding the relative efficacy of these therapies, though several clinical trials are ongoing. Safety concerns applicable to this class of therapeutics relate primarily to immunogenicity and mechanism of action, and include infusion-related or injection-related reactions, development of hypogammaglobulinemia (leading to increased infection and malignancy risk), and decreased vaccine response. Exploration of alternative dose/dosing schedules might be an effective strategy for mitigating these risks. Future development of biosimilar medications might make these therapies more readily available. Although anti-CD20 mAb therapies have led to significant improvements in disease outcomes, CNS-penetrant therapies are still needed to more effectively address the compartmentalized inflammation thought to play an important role in disability progression.

Advances in the long-term treatment of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder

Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) is a rare autoimmune neuroinflammatory disorder with a prevalence of 1-5/100,000 globally, characterized by attacks of the central nervous system including but not limited to optic neuritis, transverse myelitis and brainstem lesions, including area postrema lesions. These autoimmune attacks can lead to irreversible damage if left untreated, therefore strategies have been developed to prevent relapses. Initial off-label treatments have achieved variable levels of success in relapse prevention, but improved relapse prevention and quality of life remain a goal in the field. A better understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of NMOSD over the last 10 years has led to newer, more specific approaches in treatment, culminating in the first FDA approved treatments in the disease. In this review, we will discuss the seminal trials of PREVENT or Eculizumab in the treatment of aquaporin-4 (AQP4)-IgG positive NMOSD, N-Momentum or Inebilizumab in the study of NMOSD (both AQP4-IgG positive and negative) and SAkura Sky and SAkuraStar which studied satralizumab in AQP4-IgG seropositive and seronegative NMOSD patients. We will also discuss the extension trials of each of these medications and what lead to their approval in AQP4-IgG seropositive NMOSD patients. We will then examine treatments in the pipeline for adult and pediatric NMOSD patients and conclude with discussions on treatment considerations in pregnant patients and how to approach treatment of NMOSD patients during COVID.

Novel potential pharmacological applications of dimethyl fumarate-an overview and update

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) is an FDA-approved drug for the treatment of psoriasis and multiple sclerosis. DMF is known to stabilize the transcription factor Nrf2, which in turn induces the expression of antioxidant response element genes. It has also been shown that DMF influences autophagy and participates in the transcriptional control of inflammatory factors by inhibiting NF-κB and its downstream targets. DMF is receiving increasing attention for its potential to be repurposed for several diseases. This versatile molecule is indeed able to exert beneficial effects on different medical conditions through a pleiotropic mechanism, in virtue of its antioxidant, immunomodulatory, neuroprotective, anti-inflammatory, and anti-proliferative effects. A growing number of preclinical and clinical studies show that DMF may have important therapeutic implications for chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular and respiratory pathologies, cancer, eye disorders, neurodegenerative conditions, and systemic or organ specific inflammatory and immune-mediated diseases. This comprehensive review summarizes and highlights the plethora of DMF's beneficial effects and underlines its repurposing opportunities in a variety of clinical conditions.

Immune response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in multiple sclerosis patients after rituximab treatment interruption

Peripheral B cell depletion via anti-CD20 treatment is a highly effective disease-modifying treatment for reducing new relapses in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. A drawback of rituximab (RTX) and other anti-CD20 antibodies is a poor immune response to vaccination. While this can be mitigated by treatment interruption of at least six months prior to vaccination, the timing to resume treatment while maintaining subsequent vaccine responses remains undetermined. Here, we characterized SARS-CoV-2 S-directed antibody and B cell responses throughout three BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine doses in RTX-treated MS patients, with the first two doses given during treatment interruption. We examined B-cell mediated immune responses in blood samples from patients with RTX-treated MS throughout three BNT162b2 vaccine doses, compared to an age- and sex-matched healthy control group. The first vaccine dose was given 1.3 years (median) after the last RTX infusion, the second dose one month after the first, and the third dose four weeks after treatment re-initiation. We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 S-directed antibody levels using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and the neutralization capacity of patient serum against SARS-CoV-2 S-pseudotyped lentivirus using luciferase reporter assay. In addition, we assessed switched memory (CD19+CD20+CD27+IgD-), unswitched memory (CD19+CD20+CD27+IgD+), naïve (CD19+CD20+CD27-IgD+), and double negative (DN, CD19+CD20+CD27-IgD-) B cell frequencies, as well as their SARS-CoV-2 S-specific (CoV+) and Decay Accelerating Factor-negative (DAF-) subpopulations, using flow cytometry. After two vaccine doses, S-binding antibody levels and neutralization capacity in SARS-CoV-2-naïve MS patients were comparable to vaccinated healthy controls, albeit with greater variation. Higher antibody response levels and CoV+-DN B cell frequencies after the second vaccine dose were predictive of a boost effect after the third dose, even after re-initiation of rituximab treatment. MS patients also exhibited lower frequencies of DAF- memory B cells, a suggested proxy for germinal centre activity, than control individuals. S-binding antibody levels in RTX-treated MS patients after two vaccine doses could help determine which individuals would need to move up their next vaccine booster dose or postpone their next RTX infusion. Our findings also offer first indications on the potential importance of antigenic stimulation of DN B cells and long-term impairment of germinal centre activity in rituximab-treated MS patients.

Risk of COVID-19 in people with multiple sclerosis who are seronegative following vaccination

BACKGROUND

People with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) treated with certain disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have attenuated IgG response following COVID-19 vaccination; however, the clinical consequences remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To report COVID-19 rates in pwMS according to vaccine serology.

METHODS

PwMS with available (1) serology 2-12 weeks following COVID-19 vaccine 2 and/or vaccine 3 and (2) clinical data on COVID-19 infection/hospitalisation were included. Logistic regression was performed to examine whether seroconversion following vaccination predicted risk of subsequent COVID-19 infection after adjusting for potential confounders. Rates of severe COVID-19 (requiring hospitalisation) were also calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 647 pwMS were included (mean age 48 years, 500 (77%) female, median Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) 3.5% and 524 (81%) exposed to DMT at the time of vaccine 1). Overall, 472 out of 588 (73%) were seropositive after vaccines 1 and 2 and 222 out of 305 (73%) after vaccine 3. Seronegative status after vaccine 2 was associated with significantly higher odds of subsequent COVID-19 infection (odds ratio (OR): 2.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.34-4.12, p = 0.0029), whereas seronegative status after vaccine 3 was not (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.57-1.91). Five people (0.8%) experienced severe COVID-19, all of whom were seronegative after most recent vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Attenuated humoral response to initial COVID-19 vaccination predicts increased risk of COVID-19 in pwMS, but overall low rates of severe COVID-19 were seen.

Effect of Disease-Modifying Therapies on COVID-19 Vaccination Efficacy in Multiple Sclerosis Patients: A Comprehensive Review

According to current knowledge, the etiopathogenesis of multiple sclerosis (MS) is complex, involving genetic background as well as several environmental factors that result in dysimmunity in the central nervous system (CNS). MS is an immune-mediated, inflammatory neurological disease affecting the CNS. As part of its attack on the axons of the CNS, MS witnesses varying degrees of myelin and axonal loss. A total of about 20 disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are available today that, both in clinical trials and in real-world studies, reduce disease activity, such as relapses, magnetic resonance imaging lesions, and disability accumulation. Currently, the world is facing an outbreak of the new coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which originated in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in December 2019 and spread rapidly around the globe. Viral infections play an important role in triggering and maintaining neuroinflammation through direct and indirect mechanisms. There is an old association between MS and viral infections. In the context of MS-related chronic inflammatory damage within the CNS, there has been concern regarding COVID-19 worsening neurological damage. A high rate of disability and increased susceptibility to infection have made MS patients particularly vulnerable. In addition, DMTs have been a concern during the pandemic since many DMTs have immunosuppressive properties. In this article, we discuss the impact of DMTs on COVID-19 risks and the effect of DMTs on COVID-19 vaccination efficacy and outcome in MS patients.

The benefits and risks of escalation versus early highly effective treatment in patients with multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

Multiple sclerosis is a chronic, demyelinating, inflammatory, and neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system that affects over 2 million people worldwide. Considerable advances have been made in the availability of disease modifying therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis since their introduction in the 1990s. This has led to debate regarding the optimal first-line treatment approach: a strategy of escalation versus early highly effective treatment.

AREAS COVERED

This review defines the strategies of escalation and early highly effective treatment, outlines the pros and cons of each, and provides an analysis of both the current literature and expected future directions of the field.

EXPERT OPINION

There is growing support for using early highly effective treatment as the initial therapeutic approach in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. However, much of this support stems from observational real-world studies that use historic data and lack safety outcomes or randomized control trials that compare individual high versus low-moderate efficacy therapies, instead of the approaches themselves. Randomized control trials (DELIVER-MS, TREAT-MS) are needed to systemically and prospectively compare contemporary escalation versus early highly effective treatment approaches.

Persistent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in a Multiple Sclerosis Patient on Ocrelizumab: A Case Report

A 44-year-old female patient with multiple sclerosis (MS) treated with ocrelizumab was hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia three times over the course of five months, eventually expiring. Viral sequencing of samples from her first and last admissions suggests a single persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection. We hypothesize that her immunocompromised state, due to MS treatment with an immunosuppressive monoclonal antibody, prevented her from achieving viral clearance.

COVID-19 disease frequency, risk factors, and re-infection rates in patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease receiving rituximab

INTRODUCTION

Rituximab, which is used in autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD), can cause both an increased risk of development of COVID-19 disease and re-infection due to its potent and long-acting immunosuppression. So, we aimed to evaluate the frequency, risk factors and re-infection rates of COVID-19 in ARD patients receiving rituximab.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective study was performed with patients receiving rituximab for ARD in 12 months before the onset of COVID-19 in Turkey. The data regarding severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 reverse transcription polymerized chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, clinical, laboratory, and mortality data of all patients were collected from medical records. Logistic regression analysis was used for predictors of COVID-19 disease. COVID-19 re-infection was defined as RT-PCR positivity and recurrence of acute COVID-19 symptoms after at least 1 negative RT-PCR in patients with clinical improvement.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight ARD patients with rituximab were evaluated and 23 (23%) of them had COVID-19. The presence of hypogammaglobulinemia increased the risk of COVID-19 disease 8-fold. COVID-19 pneumonia occurred in 13 (57%) and these patients' age was higher than those without pneumonia (59.6 ± 11.8 vs 44.9 ± 14.2 years, P = 0.013). Mortality due to COVID-19 was 13% and COVID-19 re-infection was seen in 20% of survivors.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of the underlying rheumatic disease and organ involvements, hypogammaglobulinemia in ARD could be a risk factor for COVID-19 development, and advanced age could be for COVID-19 severity. Moreover, COVID-19 re-infection rates are high.

Electronic health record data for assessing risk of hospitalization for COVID-19: Methodological considerations applied to multiple sclerosis

INTRODUCTION

During the COVID-19 pandemic, electronic health record (EHR) data has been used to investigate disease severity and risk factors for severe COVID-19 in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). Methodological challenges including sampling bias, and residual confounding should be considered when conducting EHR-based studies. We aimed to address these limitations related to the use of EHR data in order to identify risk factors, including the use of disease modifying therapies (DMTs), associated with hospitalization for COVID-19 amongst pwMS.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study including a sample of 47,051 pwMS using a large US-based EHR and claims linked database. Follow-up started at the beginning of the pandemic, February 20th 2020, and continued until September 30th 2020. COVID-19 diagnosis was determined by the presence of ICD-10 diagnostic code for COVID-19, or a positive diagnostic laboratory test, or an ICD-10 diagnostic code for coronaviruses. We used Cox regression modeling to assess the impact of baseline demographics, MS disease history and pre-existing comorbidities on the risk of hospitalization for COVID-19. Then, we identified 5,169 pwMS using ocrelizumab (OCR) and 3,351 pwMS using dimethyl fumarate (DMF) at baseline, and evaluated the distribution of the identified COVID-19 risk factors between the two groups. Finally, we used Cox regression models, adjusted for the identified confounders, to estimate the risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 in pwMS treated with OCR compared to DMF.

RESULTS

Among the pwMS cohort, we identified 799 COVID-19 cases (1.7%) which resulted in 182 hospitalizations for COVID-19 (0.4%). Population differences between the pwMS and COVID-19 cohorts were observed. Statistical modeling identified older age, male gender, African-American race, walking with assistance, non-ambulatory status, severe relapse requiring hospitalization in year prior to baseline, and specific comorbidities to be associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 related-hospitalization. Comparing the COVID-19 risk factors between OCR users and DMF users, MS characteristics including ambulatory status and MS subtype were highly imbalanced, likely arising from key differences in the labelled indications for these therapies. Compared to DMF use, in unadjusted (HR 1.58, 95% CI 0.73 - 3.44), adjusted (HR 1.28, 95% CI 0.58 - 2.83), propensity score weighted (HR 1.25, 95% CI 0.56 - 2.80), and doubly robust models (HR 1.29, 95% CI 0.57 - 2.89), no significantly increased risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 was associated with OCR use.

CONCLUSION

We observed significant population differences when comparing all pwMS to COVID-19 cases, as well as significant differences in key confounders between OCR and DMF treated patients. In unadjusted analyses we did not observe a statistically significant higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization in pwMS treated with OCR compared to DMF, with further attenuation of risk when adjusting for the key confounders. This study re-emphasises the importance to appropriately consider both sampling and confounding bias in EHR-based MS research.

Tixagevimab and Cilgavimab (Evusheld™) Prophylaxis Prevents Breakthrough COVID-19 Infections in Immunosuppressed Population: 6-Month Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Persons with neuroinflammatory diseases (pwNID) treated with potent immunosuppressives are at risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and reduced vaccine seroconversion. We aimed at determining the real-world efficacy of tixagevimab and cilgavimab (Evusheld™) in immunosuppressed pwNID in preventing breakthrough COVID-19 infections.

METHODS

31 immunosuppressed pwNID were followed for 6 months after administration of tixagevimab and cilgavimab as a prophylactic COVID-19 medication (January 2022-July 2022). Only pwNID treated with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies and sphingosine-1-phosphate modulators were considered eligible for the study. A control group of 126 immunosuppressed pwNID (38 seropositive and 88 seronegative after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination) were included. Breakthrough COVID-19 infections rate and their severity was determined over the follow-up.

RESULTS

The pwNID treated with tixagevimab and cilgavimab had more comorbidities when compared with the total and seronegative pwNID control group (54.8% vs. 30.2% vs. 27.3%, p = 0.02 and p = 0.005, respectively). After a 6-month follow-up, significantly lower numbers of pwNID treated with tixagevimab and cilgavimab had breakthrough COVID-19 when compared with the control pwNID group (6.5% vs. 34.1%, p = 0.002) and seronegative control pwNID group (6.5% vs. 38.6%, p < 0.001). All COVID-19 infections in Evusheld-treated pwNID were mild, whereas 9/43 COVID-19 infections in the control group were moderate/severe. No side effects to tixagevimab and cilgavimab were recorded.

CONCLUSION

In pwNID treated with immunosuppressive therapies, tixagevimab and cilgavimab (Evusheld™) significantly reduced the numbers and severity of breakthrough COVID-19 infections during the Omicron (BA.2-BA.5 variants) wave.

Optimal dose of rituximab in ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation in patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers: A single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The clinical outcomes of ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation have improved with the introduction of desensitization therapy with rituximab. However, rituximab prevents not only antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) but also increases the risk of adverse events, such as infection. For ABOi kidney transplantation in patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers, we previously used a rituximab-free desensitization protocol and then initiated a single dose of 100 mg rituximab in 2016. We retrospectively compared the outcomes of ABOi kidney transplantation in patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers before and after the introduction of rituximab.

METHODS

ABOi kidney transplantations (n = 142) in patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers between 2007 and 2021 were included. Patients were divided into two groups (with and without rituximab) for desensitization. The primary outcomes were the incidence of acute AMR and infection.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients were desensitized without rituximab (rituximab-free group), and 76 were pretreated with 100 mg rituximab (rituximab group) before transplantation. The incidence of acute AMR was significantly lower in the rituximab group than in the rituximab-free group (.0% [0/76] vs. 7.6% [5/66], respectively; p = .047). Post-transplantation anti-A/B antibody titers were also lower in the rituximab group than in the rituximab-free group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events, including infections, between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In ABOi kidney transplantation patients with low anti-A/B antibody titers, the desensitization protocol with a single dose of 100 mg rituximab was effective in preventing acute AMR without increasing the risk of other adverse events.

Case report: Variant-specific pre-exposure prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in multiple sclerosis patients lacking vaccination responses

Sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators and anti-CD20 treatment are widely used disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis. Unfortunately, they may impair the patient’s ability to mount sufficient humoral and T-cellular responses to vaccination, which is of special relevance in the context of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We present here a case series of six multiple sclerosis patients on treatment with sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators who failed to develop SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies and T-cells after three doses of vaccination. Due to their ongoing immunotherapy, lacking vaccination response, and additional risk factors, we offered them pre-exposure prophylactic treatment with monoclonal SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies. Initially, treatment was conducted with the antibody cocktail casirivimab/imdevimab. When the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant became predominant, we switched treatment to monoclonal antibody sotrovimab due to its sustained neutralizing ability also against the Omicron strain. Since sotrovimab was approved only for the treatment of COVID-19 infection and not for pre-exposure prophylaxis, we switched treatment to tixagevimab/cilgavimab as soon as it was granted marketing authorization in the European Union. This antibody cocktail has retained, albeit reduced, neutralizing activity against the Omicron variant and is approved for pre-exposure prophylaxis. No severe adverse events were recorded for our patients. One patient had a positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 under treatment with sotrovimab, but was asymptomatic. The other five patients did not develop symptoms of an upper respiratory tract infection or evidence of a SARS-CoV-2 infection during the time of treatment up until the finalization of this report. SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibody treatment should be considered individually for multiple sclerosis patients lacking adequate vaccination responses on account of their immunomodulatory treatment, especially in times of high incidences of SARS-CoV-2 infection.