← Back
NeuroTrials.ai
Neurology Clinical Trial Database

DS-NMOSD COHORT

Comparative Effectiveness of Disease-Modifying Treatments in Double Seronegative Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder

Year of Publication: 2026

Authors: Mahler JV, Vallejos GB, Mikami T, et al.

Journal: Neurology Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation

Citation: Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2026;13(2):e200514

Link: https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.0000000000200514

Bottom Line

In a multicenter international cohort of 103 patients with DS-NMOSD, anti-CD20 therapy (mostly rituximab) was associated with a ~98% lower relapse incidence rate ratio than the pretreatment period and substantially outperformed nonspecific immunosuppressants and MS DMTs, supporting B-cell depletion as first-line therapy.

Major Points

  • Largest reported cohort of double seronegative NMOSD (n=103) from 6 countries; median follow-up 6 years.
  • Anti-CD20 agents reduced relapse IRR to 0.02 (95% CI 0.01-0.04) vs pretreatment; nonspecific immunosuppressants 0.09 (0.07-0.13); MS DMTs 0.13 (0.06-0.30).
  • Estimated adjusted ARR: anti-CD20 0.17, NSIS 0.76, MS DMTs 1.07; Bonferroni-corrected anti-CD20 vs NSIS p=0.003 and vs MS DMTs p=0.002.
  • Cox HR for relapse: anti-CD20 vs MS DMTs 0.06 (95% CI 0.02-0.24, p<0.001); log-rank for anti-CD20 vs NSIS p=0.0001.
  • Within most-used drugs, relapse-free status: rituximab 84.6%, mycophenolate 74.1%, azathioprine 46% (chi-squared p=0.00012); azathioprine vs rituximab HR 4.95 (p=0.00016).
  • Traditional MS DMTs (interferon, glatiramer, fumarates, alemtuzumab) did not appear as harmful in DS-NMOSD as in AQP4+ NMOSD, but still inferior to anti-CD20.
  • Class IV evidence supporting anti-CD20 as preferred first-line relapse prevention in DS-NMOSD.

Design

Study Type: Retrospective multicenter international cohort study (Class IV evidence)

Randomization:

Blinding: Unblinded (retrospective chart review)

Enrollment Period: Data collection December 2023 - November 2024

Follow-up Duration: Median 6 years (IQR 4.1-10.9)

Centers: 10

Countries: United States, Brazil, United Kingdom, Thailand, Turkiye, China

Sample Size: 103

Analysis: Negative binomial mixed-effects regression with adjustment for covariates; Cox proportional hazards; estimated marginal means with Bonferroni correction; treatment exposure modeled as time-varying


Inclusion Criteria

  • Adults >=18 years at the time of data collection
  • Fulfilled IPND-2015 AQP4-IgG-seronegative NMOSD criteria (2 core clinical syndromes, at least one supporting neuroimaging feature, no alternative diagnosis)
  • Negative serum AQP4-IgG via cell-based assay at least once with subsequent consistently negative testing
  • Negative serum MOG-IgG via cell-based assay at least once with subsequent consistently negative testing
  • At least 12 months of clinical follow-up
  • Diagnosis of DS-NMOSD confirmed as leading diagnosis at last follow-up by senior neuroimmunologists

Exclusion Criteria

  • Fewer than 12 months of follow-up
  • Missing treatment data
  • Combination therapy with 2 or more concurrent DMTs
  • Documented medication adherence concerns
  • Suspicion for an alternative diagnosis such as atypical multiple sclerosis or neurosarcoidosis

Arms

FieldAnti-CD20Nonspecific Immunosuppressants (NSIS)MS DMTsControl
InterventionRituximab or ocrelizumab (B-cell depletion)Azathioprine, mycophenolate, methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, or mitoxantroneInterferon-beta, glatiramer, fumarates, or alemtuzumabNo chronic DMT (time from disease onset to first DMT or full follow-up for untreated patients)
DurationVariable, time-varying exposure modeled per patientVariable, time-varying exposure modeled per patientVariable, time-varying exposure modeled per patientVariable

Outcomes

OutcomeTypeControlInterventionHR / OR / RRP-value
Incidence rate ratio (IRR) of relapses on each DMT class compared with the pretreatment period (negative binomial mixed-effects regression, adjusted for covariates)Primary<0.001 for all DMT groups vs pretreatment
Adjusted annualized relapse rate (ARR) - Anti-CD20SecondaryValue: 0.17 (95% CI 0.07-0.40)
Adjusted ARR - NSISSecondaryValue: 0.76 (95% CI 0.40-1.43)
Adjusted ARR - MS DMTsSecondaryValue: 1.07 (95% CI 0.39-2.93)
Pairwise ARR anti-CD20 vs NSIS (Bonferroni-corrected)Secondary0.003
Pairwise ARR anti-CD20 vs MS DMTs (Bonferroni-corrected)Secondary0.002
Pairwise ARR NSIS vs MS DMTsSecondaryNot significant
Cox HR for relapse - anti-CD20 vs MS DMTsSecondary0.06 (95% CI 0.02-0.24)<0.001
Cox HR for relapse - NSIS vs MS DMTsSecondary0.35 (95% CI 0.12-1.04)0.059
Kaplan-Meier anti-CD20 vs NSIS log-rankSecondary0.0001
Relapse-free status during rituximab treatment periodsSecondaryValue: 84.6% (44/52)
Relapse-free status during mycophenolate treatment periodsSecondaryValue: 74.1% (20/27)
Relapse-free status during azathioprine treatment periodsSecondaryValue: 46% (23/50)
Azathioprine vs rituximab (univariate Cox)Secondary4.95 (95% CI 2.16-11.38)0.00016
Mycophenolate vs rituximab (univariate Cox)Secondary2.03 (95% CI 0.71-5.79)0.18
Mycophenolate vs azathioprine (univariate Cox)Secondary0.41 (95% CI 0.18-0.94)0.03
Early (first-line) vs late rituximabSecondary1.28 (95% CI 0.3-5.4)0.73
Pretreatment duration (each additional month)Secondary<0.001
NSIS discontinuation - driven by relapsesAdverse46% of NSIS discontinuations
NSIS discontinuation - adverse eventsAdverse29% of NSIS discontinuations
NSIS discontinuation - pregnancy planningAdverse14% of NSIS discontinuations
Anti-CD20 discontinuationAdverseRare; too few events for class-level rate comparison
NoteAdverseDetailed adverse event tables (e.g., infusion reactions, infections) were not reported in this retrospective cohort; safety data were limited to discontinuation reasons recorded in charts

Subgroup Analysis

Sex, race, ethnicity, age at onset, suspicion for MOGAD, and clinical onset syndrome (ON, TM, simultaneous ON+TM, area postrema, brainstem, or cerebral) were not significantly associated with relapse rate after adjustment. Longer interval from disease onset to first DMT was associated with a slightly lower IRR (0.98 per month, p<0.001), interpreted as confounding by indication (milder disease delays DMT).


Criticisms

  • Retrospective observational design with potential residual confounding and confounding by indication despite multivariable adjustment.
  • Class IV evidence; no randomization or blinding.
  • Roughly 23% of patients tested with fixed (rather than live) cell-based assays, which have lower sensitivity for MOG-IgG and AQP4-IgG; cannot fully exclude misclassified MOGAD or AQP4+ cases.
  • Median time from onset to antibody testing was long (33.6 months for AQP4-IgG and 47.1 months for MOG-IgG), and only 27% were tested before any DMT; immunotherapy can cause MOG-IgG sero-reversion.
  • Neuroimaging was not required for attack definition and MRI was available in only ~60% of attacks; possible inclusion of pseudorelapses.
  • Corticosteroid maintenance regimens excluded from exposure modeling due to inconsistent documentation; acute rescue therapy data also incompletely captured.
  • Patients on combination DMTs excluded, possibly skewing the cohort toward milder phenotypes; selection bias from IPND-2015 diagnostic requirement of 2 core syndromes biases toward relapsing disease.
  • Small number of patients on MS DMTs (n=7), eculizumab (n=1), tocilizumab (n=2), and IVIg (n=3) limits inference for these classes.
  • Adverse event reporting was limited to documented discontinuation reasons rather than systematic safety capture.

Funding

Not specified in the available full text

Based on: DS-NMOSD COHORT (Neurology Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation, 2026)

Authors: Mahler JV, Vallejos GB, Mikami T, et al.

Citation: Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2026;13(2):e200514

Content summarized and formatted by NeuroTrials.ai.