3.8 Review

Multiple Sclerosis Treatment in the COVID-19 Era: A Risk-Benefit Approach

Journal

NEUROLOGY INTERNATIONAL
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages 368-377

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/neurolint14020030

Keywords

multiple sclerosis; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; anti-CD20; fingolimod; ocrelizumab; S1P-modulators; DMD; MS therapy-related risks; vaccination

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article reviews the risks faced by people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) during the COVID-19 pandemic and discusses issues related to vaccination. It proposes strategies for the clinical management of pwMS to minimize the risks associated with COVID-19.
The COVID-19 pandemic poses an ongoing global challenge, and several risk factors make people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) particularly susceptible to running a severe disease course. Although the literature does report numerous articles on the risk factors for severe COVID-19 and vaccination response in pwMS, there is a scarcity of reviews integrating both these aspects into strategies aimed at minimizing risks. The aim of this review is to describe the risk of vulnerable pwMS exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the issues related to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and to evidence possible future strategies in the clinical management of pwMS. The authors searched for papers on severe COVID-19 risk factors, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and people with multiple sclerosis in support of this narrative literature review. We propose a multilevel strategy aimed at: the evaluation of risk factors for severe COVID-19 in people with multiple sclerosis, identifying the most appropriate vaccination schedule that is safe for people on disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) and a strict follow-up of high-risk people with multiple sclerosis to allow for the prompt administration of monoclonal antibodies to manage COVID-19 risks in this patient population.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available