Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Twenty years on from its initial approval as the first monoclonal antibody for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS), natalizumab remains a valuable high-efficacy treatment option for people with relapsing-remitting MS, with robust real-world evidence supporting its long-term efficacy and well-characterized safety profile, provided that the risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is monitored and mitigated. This review explores the long-term clinical impact of natalizumab. It draws on two decades of experience to guide treatment strategies with natalizumab, including its use early in the disease course, switching to natalizumab, its use during vaccination, and PML risk management and exit strategies. Guidance on the use of natalizumab in pregnant and breastfeeding women with MS, children with MS, and people with comorbidities is discussed, along with reflections on what has been learned from 20 years with natalizumab, and what the future holds for this impactful treatment in MS and beyond.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

multiple sclerosis natalizumab treatment strategies

Introduction

In 2004, natalizumab became the first monoclonal antibody approved to treat multiple sclerosis (MS),^1,2 marking the second major milestone in the MS treatment landscape following the introduction of the first interferon (IFN) treatment in 1993.^1,3 Twenty years on, the long-term efficacy and well-characterized safety profile of natalizumab is supported by robust real-world evidence (RWE).^4,5 Natalizumab has a unique mode of action,⁶ selectively compromising the immune response in the central nervous system (CNS) and gut.⁷ This results in low rates of opportunistic infections,⁴ provided that the risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is monitored and mitigated.⁸ This, combined with the recent approval of biosimilar natalizumab by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA),^9–11 which could see natalizumab become more accessible at a lower cost to healthcare systems,¹² means that it remains a valuable treatment option for MS and may hold promise for people with unmet medical need.¹³

MS is a chronic, progressive, autoimmune disease affecting the brain and spinal cord and is characterized by inflammatory and neurodegenerative processes.^14,15 Symptoms include those affecting motor and sensory function (e.g., weakness, spasticity, ataxia, and altered sensation),^16,17 vision,¹⁸ speech/swallowing,¹⁹ bladder, and bowel.^20,21 MS can also cause fatigue, cognitive, and mood symptoms.¹⁴ MS affects around 2.3 million people worldwide and is usually diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 50²²; however, between 3% and 10% of cases are diagnosed in children under the age of 16.²³ The 2024 updates to the McDonald criteria for diagnosis of MS are expected to help clinicians make accurate diagnosis at an earlier stage of the disease.²⁴

Relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) is the most common clinical phenotype, occurring in approximately 85% of people with MS, and it is characterized by alternating periods of distinct relapse and full or partial recovery of neurological function, with relapse-associated worsening of disability.²⁵ However, even from the early phases of RRMS, the majority of disability progression is progression independent of relapse activity (PIRA), which is the predominant driver of disability accumulation.^26,27

Current treatment strategies aim to reduce the risk of relapses, and potentially, disability progression, with treatment response assessed via clinical measures and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity.³ Treatment objectives for people with MS include the prevention of novel disease activity based on clinical and imaging features, which is termed “no evidence of disease activity (NEDA)” as well as “minimal evidence of disease activity.”²⁸ In this line, a retrospective analysis from the natalizumab AFFIRM clinical trial was the first to use freedom from disease activity as a measure of treatment efficacy and showed that disease remission could be an attainable treatment goal in MS.^29,30

Over the past three decades, there has been a large increase in the number of therapeutic options available for MS,³ with around 20 disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) currently approved by the FDA and/or the EMA.^31–33 The European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS) and European Academy of Neurology (EAN) guidelines recommend early treatment with DMTs for people with active RRMS, choosing between the wide range of available drugs from those that are “moderately effective” to “highly effective.”³

Two distinct treatment strategies are often used in MS: (1) escalation, which involves starting treatment with limited efficacy, low side effect treatment options, and then switching to a high-efficacy treatment (HET), with potentially more side effects, if necessary, and (2) the early initiation of HET.^34,35 Early use of DMTs is associated with better long-term treatment outcomes (Figure 1(a)); however, early use of HET, including alemtuzumab, natalizumab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, and off-label rituximab, has not only been demonstrated to provide a greater reduction in relapse rates than lower-efficacy DMTs, such as IFN beta and glatiramer acetate, but more recent evidence shows that treating early with an HET also results in better long-term outcomes in terms of disability accumulation.^34,36–39 Additionally, RWE supports the use of natalizumab early in the disease course (Figure 1(b)), as a study of people who initiated treatment with either natalizumab or a lower-efficacy DMT after their MS diagnosis found that those initiating natalizumab were less likely to experience a relapse during the follow-up period.⁴⁰ Early use of natalizumab is discussed further in the section of this article, “Practical guidance on the clinical use of natalizumab.”

Figure 1.

Long-term prognosis with (a) earlier versus later initiation of treatment and (b) early initiation of natalizumab versus lower-efficacy DMTs.

Natalizumab: Mode of action

Natalizumab is a humanized anti-α4β1 integrin monoclonal antibody⁴² that was approved by the FDA in 2004² for the treatment of adults with relapsing forms of MS,⁴³ and by the EMA in 2006 for the treatment of adults with highly active RRMS.⁴⁴ A biosimilar, a biological medicine that has no clinically meaningful differences in quality, safety, and efficacy versus an already licensed reference biological medicine, has been developed for natalizumab and was approved for these same indications by the FDA and EMA in 2023.^9–11,45 Natalizumab and its biosimilar are also approved by the FDA to treat Crohn’s disease.^10,11,43

Figure 2 shows the mode of action of a range of high-efficacy DMTs used to treat MS. Natalizumab has a distinct and unique mode of action from other HET used in MS⁶ (Figure 2(a) and (b)).

Figure 2.

Mode of action for (a) high-efficacy DMTs for MS and (b) natalizumab specifically.

Unlike treatments that cause long-term B-cell depletion, natalizumab prevents leukocytes from entering the brain and spinal cord by blocking the interaction between α4β1 integrin and VCAM-1, preventing leukocytes from crossing the blood-brain barrier (BBB).⁴² This inhibition of leukocyte migration into the CNS reduces new MS lesion formation.^42,46,47 Natalizumab may also inhibit ongoing inflammation by disrupting the interactions between inflammatory leukocytes and extracellular matrix proteins,⁴⁸ or by inducing apoptosis of activated T cells.⁴⁹ Additionally, natalizumab treatment has been shown to indirectly impact microglial activation in the brain, a process considered to be associated with MS disease progression; a recent study of 21 people with MS found that microglial activation was reduced following 1 year of treatment with natalizumab.⁵⁰

Furthermore, natalizumab may have other immunological effects beyond VLA-4 interaction: an observational longitudinal cohort study of 22 people with RRMS found an increase in anti-inflammatory cytokines just a few hours to days after the first intravenous (IV) infusion of natalizumab,⁵¹ and a recent meta-anlaysis has shown that natalizumab can lead to a reduction in intrathecal oligoclonal bands in cerebrospinal fluid, suggesting a possible effect on memory plasma cells.⁵²

Unique properties and clinical impact of natalizumab

The efficacy of natalizumab in people with RRMS was demonstrated in the phase III AFFIRM trial, with a significant reduction in relapse rate, disease activity, and disability progression versus placebo.⁵³ The phase III SENTINEL trial also confirmed that natalizumab in combination with IFN beta-1a was significantly more effective than IFN beta-1a alone; however, natalizumab was only approved as a monotherapy.^43,54 With almost two decades of experience, natalizumab is now a well-established and well-characterized treatment,⁵⁵ which offers a range of benefits to people with RRMS. Not only does natalizumab provide long-term clinical effectiveness, but also, because of its distinct mode of action, natalizumab exhibits unique properties compared with other MS treatments, in particular, rapid onset of action and reversibility.

Rapid onset of action

Natalizumab treatment has a rapid onset of action. In a study of the effect of a single dose of natalizumab administered soon after the onset of an MS relapse, changes in MRI activity were noted as early as 1 week after dosing.⁵⁶ In AFFIRM, a significant reduction in the cumulative risk of relapse was observed early, within 8 weeks, and a significant reduction in the annualized relapse rate (ARR) was observed within 3 months.⁵⁷ The rapid action of natalizumab may be explained by its unique mode of action, with the inhibition of leukocyte migration into the CNS preventing lesion formation.⁵⁷

Comparing HET options, the phase IV REVEAL study, which investigated natalizumab versus fingolimod in people with RRMS, found that the effect on disease activity was more rapid with natalizumab than with fingolimod and that T1 gadolinium-enhancing lesion accumulation was lower with natalizumab than with fingolimod at 4 weeks (63% lower at 4 weeks (p = 0.353), ⩾70% lower at 12 weeks (p = 0.030), which was maintained at 24 weeks (p = 0.008)).⁵⁸ Additionally, a study assessing the effect of natalizumab versus ocrelizumab on quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes in people with MS found that those treated with natalizumab experienced a shorter time to clinically meaningful improvement in several QoL domains, including cognitive function, compared with ocrelizumab (event time ratio (95% confidence interval (CI)): 0.37 (0.24–0.57); p < 0.001).⁵⁹ In two other studies, the effect of ocrelizumab on disability progression⁶⁰ and ofatumumab on disability progression and ARR⁶¹ were not measured until 12 weeks after the first dose,^60,61 although a phase II study of ofatumumab showed rapid B-cell depletion within 14 days.⁶² Rituximab was found to reduce the number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions from 12 weeks after the first dose, compared with placebo.⁶³

Reversibility

Given the wide range of therapies available to people with RRMS, clinicians should consider the temporal nature and reversibility of a treatment’s biological effects, as this could impact treatment sequencing should someone need to switch to a new treatment.⁶⁴

The effects of natalizumab on peripheral immune cells and pharmacodynamic markers are reversible, with both peripheral immune cell count and pharmacodynamic marker levels starting to decline 8–12 weeks after the final natalizumab dose, returning to pre-treatment levels by 16 weeks.⁶⁴ The risk of rebound MS disease upon cessation of natalizumab and guidance on exit strategies is discussed in the section on “Exit strategies in people with high PML risk.”

The reversibility of natalizumab treatment is in contrast to other HET immunotherapies available for RRMS that act to deplete specific cell populations, such as alemtuzumab and ocrelizumab, where reconstitution of depleted B- or T-cell populations can take 9 months or longer.⁶⁴ This can present an issue for treatment sequencing, as long-lasting effects on the immune system could present safety concerns when using sequential treatments.⁶⁵ However, after discontinuation of natalizumab, the rapid reconstitution of the peripheral immune system may allow increased flexibility in treatment sequencing.⁶⁴

Long-term clinical effectiveness

As the first monoclonal antibody to be approved for MS,¹ natalizumab benefits from the longest period of RWE of any HET for MS, with several studies demonstrating the long-term clinical effectiveness of natalizumab. The Tysabri Observational Program (TOP) 10-year interim analysis included 6148 people with RRMS and found that the reduction in ARR seen after 1 year was sustained over 10 years of natalizumab treatment.⁴ Additionally, an Austrian study of 1596 people found that ARR reduction on natalizumab was sustained over a follow-up time of up to 14 years.⁶⁶

Confirmed disability improvement (CDI) was first described in a post hoc analysis of the AFFIRM trial where natalizumab increased the probability of 3-month CDI over 2 years compared with placebo.^67,68 A separate TOP analysis including 5384 people with RRMS found that disability improvement on natalizumab could be sustained over 8 years.⁶⁹ Furthermore, the TOP 10-year interim analysis found that at 10 years, the cumulative probability of 24-week CDI was 33.1%, and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores remained stable over 10 years of treatment with natalizumab.⁴

A study from Denmark, which followed 2424 people treated with natalizumab across a 13-year time period, found strong RWE for efficient suppression of clinical relapses, EDSS worsening, and radiological activity.⁷⁰ Notably in this study, MRI disease activity (defined as any new/enlarging T2 lesions or any gadolinium-enhancing lesions) was rare in people treated with natalizumab, with just 2.7% of people showing signs of MRI activity between 26 and 38 months after treatment initiation.⁷⁰ An extensive observational study of people with MS treated with natalizumab in Spain found that, among the 825 people treated with natalizumab for at least a year, there was a significant decrease in EDSS score, with the mean EDSS score decreasing from 3.71 (95% CI 3.60–3.82) at baseline to 3.37 (95% CI 3.25–3.49) after 12 months of treatment.⁵ The effect of natalizumab on disability improvement may be linked, according to the author’s opinion, to its suppression of the evolution of new gadolinium-enhancing to T1-hypointense lesions and a reduction of axonal degeneration in relapsing forms of MS.^71,72

Health-related QoL improvements

In addition to the long-term efficacy data on the prevention of relapse, disability accumulation, and disability improvement described above, natalizumab has been shown to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) significantly in both clinical trial^73,74 and real-world^75,76 settings. In particular, a study of 195 people who had been prescribed natalizumab highlighted the value of patient-reported outcomes in assessing the potential benefits of natalizumab and found that the majority of people (>92%) had stable or improved total, motor, and cognitive fatigue after 1 year of treatment.⁷⁷

Comparisons with other HETs

The efficacy of natalizumab has been compared to other HET options in several studies. In the BEST-MS prospective study of 223 people with RRMS, significantly more people treated with natalizumab had NEDA after 1 year versus those treated with fingolimod.⁷⁸ Another real-world study of 174 people comparing natalizumab with fingolimod found that a significantly greater proportion of people treated with natalizumab had NEDA after 4 years compared to those treated with fingolimod.⁷⁹ In a retrospective observational cohort study, which included 740 people with RRMS, natalizumab had a similar effect to anti-CD20 therapy (rituximab or ocrelizumab) on relapse rate and disability progression in people switching from fingolimod.⁸⁰ Furthermore, a study of the MSBase cohort comparing cladribine to other immunotherapies for MS found that cladribine was associated with a higher ARR than natalizumab, and the risk of disability worsening was lower in people treated with natalizumab than in those treated with cladribine.⁸¹ Taken together, these studies indicate that natalizumab has improved efficacy with respect to the outcomes studied versus fingolimod or cladribine and comparable efficacy versus anti-CD20 therapies.

Safety and tolerability of natalizumab

Long-term safety and tolerability

Natalizumab demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile within the 2-year evaluation period of the phase III AFFIRM study, with both serious adverse events (SAEs) and overall infection rates similar between people receiving natalizumab and those receiving placebo.⁵³ Real-world, long-term safety data are consistent with the results of the AFFIRM clinical trial: in the 10-year analysis of TOP, over 85% of people who received natalizumab did not experience any SAEs.⁴ The most common SAEs were infections and infestations (4.1%); malignancy rates were 1.1%, and while breast cancer was the most frequent malignancy, it occurred at a rate of 86.7 per 100,000 patient-years, which is lower than the expected European age-standardized incidence rate of 94.2 per 100,000.⁴ The incidence of PML in the TOP cohort was 0.9%, and the incidence of non-PML opportunistic infections was 0.2%,⁴ which included herpes zoster, herpes meningitis, encephalitis, herpes simplex encephalitis, herpes zoster disseminated, listeria meningitis (sepsis), pneumonia, and pulmonary Mycobacterium kansasii infection.⁴ In rare cases, natalizumab may increase the risk of herpes simplex virus reactivation in the CNS, leading to herpes encephalitis; however, these infections may present with atypical clinical features.^82–84

Anti-natalizumab antibodies

Because natalizumab is a biologic treatment, some people develop anti-natalizumab antibodies, a fraction of which are persistent and have the potential to neutralize the drug’s effect.⁸⁵ In the AFFIRM trial, 57 people receiving natalizumab (9%) had detectable anti-natalizumab binding antibodies at some time during the study.⁵³ Of these, persistent antibodies developed in 37 people (6%), and these people had an increase in infusion-related adverse events (AEs) and a loss of efficacy of natalizumab.⁵³ A retrospective observational study of 1251 people with MS who had experienced either an infusion-related event (IRE) or disease exacerbation while receiving natalizumab found that 12.3% of this cohort had detectable anti-natalizumab antibodies.⁸⁵ These antibodies were typically detected earlier in the treatment course, with anti-natalizumab antibodies more frequently detected during the first six infusions.⁸⁵ Anti-natalizumab antibodies were more frequently detected among people with IREs compared to those with disease exacerbation (21.6% vs 10.8%), suggesting that anti-natalizumab antibodies may have an impact on the development of IRE and, to a lesser extent, disease exacerbation.⁸⁵ When a drug is released to the market, as in the case of natalizumab, anti-drug antibody testing may add to a risk-minimization plan (for IRE and anaphylactic reactions), shorten the time that people stay on treatment with a drug that is not effective for them, and consequently promote beneficial therapeutic switches.⁸⁶ However, persistent disease activity while taking natalizumab would result in a change of treatment strategy. This would make anti-natalizumab antibody testing unnecessary, although testing for anti-drug antibodies may indicate loss of treatment function in people with stable disease, thus enabling an early treatment change.

In the authors’ experience, anti-drug antibody testing strategies in clinical practice vary significantly by geographic region and are not always available. For example, in Denmark anti-drug antibodies are routinely tested at 3, 6, and 12 months, and if possible, re-analyzed 1–3 months later, while authors from Austria, Germany, and the UK only routinely test at 12 and 24 months into treatment if the person with MS experiences infusion reactions, and if there is an early lack of efficacy. In Sweden, anti-drug antibodies are tested only in those with an infusion-related reaction and in cases of treatment failure. However, many healthcare professionals (HCPs) are not regularly testing, as when adverse reactions or a lack of efficacy is experienced, a switch in treatment strategy would be considered regardless.

PML risk management

PML infection is an important safety concern related to natalizumab treatment.⁸⁷ It is an opportunistic CNS infection caused by the John Cunningham (JC) virus that can be fatal or result in severe disability.^9,44,88 PML most commonly occurs in people with HIV infection, lymphoproliferative disease, and in people who are receiving natalizumab, and can also occur in association with other drugs, such as those used for organ transplantation.⁸⁹ Other drugs have been associated with a risk of PML, including other HETs for MS⁸⁹; however, the prevalence of PML in people with MS taking other DMTs is much lower than that associated with natalizumab.⁸⁸ Proposed mechanisms of action underlying the increased risk of PML in people taking natalizumab include reduction of JC virus-related CNS immunosurveillance by prevention of JC virus-specific cytotoxic T-cell entry into CNS tissue or other sites where JC virus may be dormant and blocking of α4β1 integrin receptors, leading to the release of B cells from bone marrow and spleen, which is the common site of JC virus latency.⁹⁰ In either case, reactivation of latent JC virus by the action of natalizumab then triggers the development of PML.⁹⁰ For diagnosis of PML, an evaluation including a gadolinium-enhanced MRI scan of the brain and, for confirmation, cerebrospinal fluid analysis for JC virus DNA is required.^43,91,92

Following the approval of natalizumab by the FDA in November 2004, two cases of PML in people who had received natalizumab in the SENTINEL trial (which evaluated the safety and efficacy of natalizumab in combination with IFN beta-1a) led to the withdrawal of natalizumab from the market in February 2005.^54,93 However, in June 2006, the FDA approved the reintroduction of natalizumab with revised labeling and improved safety warnings for PML risk management.^93,94 In the TOP cohort (n = 6148), only 53 (0.9%) people had developed confirmed PML over 10 years, which equates to an incidence rate of 2.034 per 1000 patient-years.⁴

The main risk factors for PML are JC virus antibody serum positivity, prior immunosuppressive treatment, and natalizumab treatment duration beyond 24 months.⁹⁵ PML risk stratification based on JC virus serologic test results, prior immunosuppressant use, and duration of natalizumab treatment, coupled with close monitoring and education, have reduced the incidence of natalizumab-associated PML in people with MS over recent years; for example, in Sweden, cumulative PML incidence fell from a high of 1.49 events per 1000 person years in 2012 to 0.72 in 2018.^8,95 Figure 3 shows a guide to mitigating PML risk.

Figure 3.

PML risk explained: (a) how to assess PML risk in people with MS and (b) PML risk over time.

Extended interval dosing, where natalizumab is given every 6 weeks (QW6) rather than every 4 weeks (QW4; standard interval dosing), is an emerging strategy in PML risk management, as the partial desaturation of α integrin receptors may enhance immune surveillance within the CNS and subsequently reduce the risk of PML.⁹⁹ A retrospective cohort study using a large dataset, the Tysabri Outreach: Unified Commitment to Health (TOUCH) program, has shown that extended interval dosing lowers PML risk compared with standard interval dosing.¹⁰⁰ When moving to extended interval dosing, several studies have shown no reduction in the efficacy of natalizumab when moving to extended interval dosing in relation to MRI activity and relapses.^101,102 In particular, the phase III NOVA study comprising 499 people with RRMS who had been treated with natalizumab Q4W without relapse for 1 year or more and randomized to switch to natalizumab Q6W or remain on natalizumab Q4W concluded that the majority of people stable on natalizumab Q4W dosing can switch to Q6W without a clinically meaningful loss of efficacy.¹⁰³ Furthermore, another study of 73 people with RRMS demonstrated that extended interval dosing in people with RRMS did not increase axonal damage, as determined by serum neurofilament light chain concentrations.¹⁰⁴ However, the efficacy of natalizumab when administered by extended interval dosing still needs to be fully determined. Therefore, the benefit/risk balance of extended interval dosing is unknown.⁴⁴

Exit strategies in people with high PML risk

A switch to an alternative treatment in people with MS who respond to natalizumab but are exposed to a higher PML risk based on the anti-JC virus index level represents an important therapeutic challenge in clinical practice.^41,105 In cases where natalizumab should be discontinued, it is important to have a clear exit strategy, as there is a risk of reactivation of MS disease activity in people who have stopped natalizumab treatment, particularly in those with a longer treatment gap after its withdrawal.¹⁰⁶ This risk of rebound can be mitigated by timely initiation of another HET after cessation of natalizumab.^106,107 In the experience of the authors, the washout period should be no greater than 8 weeks, and as early as 4–6 weeks, or even sooner as long as the person has immunocompetence. Furthermore, the risk of carryover PML (PML that develops a few months after stopping natalizumab treatment and starting an alternative DMT) should also be thought of.⁴¹ To lower this risk, lower-efficacy oral maintenance therapies may occasionally be considered to bridge patients before switching to another treatment option.⁴¹

A systematic review indicated that anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy is a suitable option after natalizumab treatment, with the demonstration of low rates of relapse and carryover PML.¹⁰⁸ The at-risk period for carryover PML is probably less than 12 months after switching from natalizumab.⁴¹ Furthermore, two observational, retrospective studies have shown ocrelizumab specifically to be an effective exit strategy after natalizumab discontinuation.^105,109 The first study demonstrated ocrelizumab to be superior to fingolimod, with a 70% lower relapse rate at 1 year¹⁰⁹; the second study showed a lower risk of relapses and new MRI activity for people switching from natalizumab to ocrelizumab versus cladribine.¹⁰⁵ The reversibility of natalizumab allows for increased flexibility in treatment sequencing,⁶⁴ as discussed in the section on “Reversibility.”

Practical guidance on the clinical use of natalizumab

Treatment strategies

IV and subcutaneous administrations

Natalizumab was first approved in 2004 as 300 mg IV infusion Q4W,² with subcutaneous (SC) administration approved by the EMA in 2021^44,110 following the pivotal DELIVER and REFINE randomized controlled trials,^111,112 where the FDA has yet to approve.⁴³ Both DELIVER and REFINE demonstrated SC-natalizumab to be reasonably comparable to IV-natalizumab in regards to pharmacokinetics/dynamics, with REFINE also showing comparable safety and efficacy between the two formulations,^111,112 and a post hoc analysis of REFINE has further demonstrated comparable efficacy with IV-natalizumab by reporting non-inferiority of natalizumab SC on ARR.¹¹³ However, there have been some concerns regarding low drug concentrations with SC administration, potentially affecting those on extended interval dosing or those with a higher body mass index (BMI),^114,115 suggesting that SC administration may not be the right application for these individuals. Regarding extended interval dosing, a retrospective study comparing the performance of extended interval dosing versus standard interval dosing found no difference in the primary analysis, though an exploratory BMI analysis revealed a potential interaction between high BMI and disease activity in those treated with extended interval dosing.¹¹⁶

SC-natalizumab offers the potential to reduce the impact of time and healthcare costs for people with MS,¹¹⁷ with a recent trend toward patient and medical staff preference for the SC formulation, largely due to its convenience and time-saving benefits.¹¹⁰ The different formulations can offer pros and cons depending on the individual, and given the preference-sensitive nature of treatment choice, the decision between IV and SC administration should be made through shared decision-making between the person with MS and their HCP.¹¹⁰

Early use

DMTs are more effective when the inflammatory stage is prominent, such as in early disease.¹¹⁸ In highly active MS, HETs such as natalizumab and ocrelizumab are needed early in the disease course to inhibit inflammation and prevent disability accrual resulting from multiple relapses.¹¹⁸ Several studies have demonstrated the benefit of early use of natalizumab. A retrospective study of DMT-naïve people showed that early initiation of natalizumab was associated with a significantly reduced relapse rate and lower risk of confirmed disability worsening compared to a first-line treatment with a lower-efficacy DMT (Figure 1(b)).⁴⁰ Another retrospective study, including 281 people with highly active MS starting HET with either natalizumab or ocrelizumab as first-line therapy within 1 year of diagnosis, found that the probability of achieving NEDA-3 was 66% with ocrelizumab and 68% with natalizumab.¹¹⁸ Additionally, a cross-sectional study from Argentina reported that people with MS starting HET, including natalizumab, early in the disease course had a significantly lower burden of treatment and higher QoL than people receiving escalation therapy.¹¹⁹ In an Austrian observational cohort study, 743 treatment-naïve people who started early intensive treatment, including 283 people receiving natalizumab, had decreased probability of relapse and EDSS progression compared with those who were treated with an escalation approach.¹²⁰ Furthermore, research into the potential benefits of very early use of natalizumab is ongoing with the AttackMS clinical trial, which is investigating the safety and efficacy of initiating natalizumab treatment within 14 days of MS symptom onset (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05418010).

Switching to natalizumab from lower-efficacy therapies or other HETs

The ECTRIMS/EAN guidelines for the treatment of MS recommend switching people treated with IFN or glatiramer acetate who show evidence of disease activity to a more efficacious drug, with studies demonstrating benefit in switching to alemtuzumab, fingolimod, or natalizumab.³ A real-world study of 2000 people with RRMS from the MSBase registry found that people demonstrated better outcomes in relapse rate and disability improvement with natalizumab than with fingolimod when switching from lower-efficacy DMTs.¹²¹ Another real-world study using data from the MSBase registry compared the effectiveness of switching to ocrelizumab, cladribine, or natalizumab in 1045 people with RRMS who had previously been taking fingolimod and found that after fingolimod cessation, ocrelizumab and natalizumab were more effective in reducing relapses than cladribine.¹²² Furthermore, in the authors’ opinion, a switch to natalizumab may be appropriate for people receiving anti-CD20 therapies who have an increased incidence of infection.

Vaccination and bridging therapy

Immunosuppressive therapy for MS, particularly anti-CD20 therapies that exert their effects via lymphocyte depletion, may compromise the desired immune response of vaccination.¹²³ Consequently, clinicians are faced with a choice to either delay treatment with these agents until vaccination schedules are completed and risk adversely affecting MS prognosis or to rapidly start anti-CD20 therapy without prior vaccination, which could potentially expose people to severe, vaccine-preventable infections.¹²³ Furthermore, unlike natalizumab, treatments that cause long-term B-cell depletion are associated with severe side effects such as hypogammaglobulinemia and infections. However, for ocrelizumab, this may be mitigated by extended interval dosing.¹²⁴

Results of a cohort study suggest that immunization with inactivated vaccines against hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and mRNA COVID-19 is safe and immunogenic in people with highly active MS receiving treatment with natalizumab.¹²³ Other studies have found that natalizumab treatment did not affect immunization with influenza or tetanus vaccines.¹²⁵ In contrast, while people treated with B-cell depleting ocrelizumab can mount an attenuated humoral response to inactivated vaccines,¹²⁶ available data indicate these people have a reduced humoral response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.¹²⁷

Regarding live vaccines, while generally not recommended for those on immunosuppressive/immunomodulating therapies, recent reports have shown that for people with MS treated with natalizumab, vaccination against varicella-zoster virus in people with highly active MS was not associated with AEs or increased disease activity,¹²⁸ and vaccination against yellow fever was not associated with worsening of MS disease activity or relapse rate in French and Swiss populations, respectively.^129,130 However, there is one report of vaccine-associated measles in a person with MS treated with natalizumab.¹³¹

For people with highly active MS who require both immunization and HET, natalizumab treatment may be used as a bridging therapy for a short-term period (3–6 months) while vaccination schedules have been completed, in order to prevent treatment delays.¹²³ Both the rapid onset of action and the reversibility of natalizumab treatment may make it suitable for use as a bridging therapy; however, this should be done with caution as a short exposure to natalizumab with a gap before redosing has been associated with higher incidences of anti-natalizumab antibodies and hypersensitivity reactions.¹³² Nonetheless, the use of natalizumab during vaccination is supported by a study which demonstrated that switching DMTs from sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulators to natalizumab to restore lymphocyte counts prior to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination may result in a robust immune response after vaccination and avoid the risk of relapse associated with DMT interruption.¹³³

Use of natalizumab in specific populations

Pregnancy and breastfeeding

Treating pregnant women with RRMS needs careful consideration of the risks and benefits to maternal and fetal health.¹³⁴ The natalizumab U.S. FDA prescribing information recommends use during pregnancy only if the potential benefit justifies the potential risk to the fetus,⁴³ while the natalizumab EMA summary of product characteristics recommends that discontinuation should be considered if a woman becomes pregnant while taking natalizumab, following a risk/benefit evaluation.^9,44 However, due to the risk of reactivation or rebound of disease activity upon cessation of natalizumab treatment, there is a rationale for continuing natalizumab at least until pregnancy is confirmed, or even during pregnancy in people with higher disease activity, as antibodies, including natalizumab, only minimally cross the placenta during the first trimester.¹²⁵

An observational cohort study including 350 pregnant women with MS exposed to natalizumab, who either stopped treatment during their first trimester or continued beyond, showed that maintaining treatment beyond the first trimester may protect against disability worsening; although there was a higher fetal risk for hematological abnormalities, most did not need treatment.¹³⁴ Additionally, an Italian study of 170 pregnancies found that in women with MS treated with natalizumab before conception, continuation of natalizumab throughout pregnancy and its early resumption after delivery mitigated the risk of clinical and radiological disease reactivation and that this approach had no major impact on newborns’ outcomes.¹³⁵

Recently, a Delphi consensus panel reached agreement that when pregnancy is planned in people with high MS disease activity, in selected cases, either immune reconstitution therapy or natalizumab should be used.¹³⁶ Furthermore, consensus was reached that natalizumab during pregnancy should be continued in people with highly active disease,¹³⁶ given the risk of rebound disease activity with natalizumab discontinuation.¹³⁷ For people with historically highly active disease who decide to continue natalizumab during pregnancy, it may be beneficial to extend the dosing interval to every 6–8 weeks until 34-week gestation, but it should not be continued after this point.^137,138 Following delivery, it is recommended to resume natalizumab treatment in the first 4 weeks after birth to minimize the risk of return of disease activity.¹³⁸

More data are needed on breastfeeding while undergoing treatment with natalizumab; however, it has been shown that natalizumab transfer to human breast milk is low, with a mean relative infant dose (a metric comparing the infant with maternal drug exposure) of 0.04% (standard deviation 0.03), which is far below the 10% threshold of concern for this metric.¹³⁹ Interdisciplinary care is vital for people with MS who are pregnant and/or breastfeeding; MS teams should work closely with specialized obstetrics and neonatology teams for off-label decisions, particularly if immunotherapy continues during pregnancy.¹³⁷

Pediatric-onset MS

There is a need for early diagnosis and treatment of MS in children, as, although the incidence and prevalence of MS is lower for children than for adults, it is the most common cause of non-traumatic neurological disability in young adults.¹⁴⁰ Furthermore, pediatric-onset MS also has a higher relapse rate than adult-onset MS, which is thought to relate to a more inflammatory disease course in pediatric MS.¹⁴¹ Historically, initiation of IFN beta or glatiramer acetate was recommended, with the use of HET reserved for people with more active disease.¹⁴² While there are no recent and specific guidelines for the treatment of pediatric-onset MS, there is increasing evidence for a strong effect of HET on reducing relapse rate, disability, and MRI activity in this population, and as such, early use of HET has been suggested as a new therapeutic approach for children with MS.¹⁴²

Several studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of natalizumab in pediatric-onset MS, with more real-world data available on natalizumab in this population than for anti-CD20 therapies.¹⁴² A post-marketing meta-analysis conducted using data from 621 children with MS treated with natalizumab, 158 of whom had data available prior to treatment, demonstrated a reduction in ARR during treatment.⁴⁴ A small Spanish study of nine children with MS found that safety and efficacy of natalizumab in children was in line with the experience published in adult populations.¹⁴³ Another study of 101 children with MS from an Italian cohort found that natalizumab was well tolerated, and efficacious in most cases.¹⁴⁴ The TyPed study, which included 21 children with MS treated with natalizumab in Portugal, also demonstrated that natalizumab may be an effective and well-tolerated DMT for pediatric MS, with results in line with the adult population.¹⁴⁵ Furthermore, a retrospective study evaluating the efficacy and safety of natalizumab in both adults and children with MS found that clinical and radiological outcomes were similar in both populations, with fewer PIRA events observed in children with MS compared with adults.¹⁴⁶ Taken together, these data support the potential use of natalizumab as a well-tolerated and effective treatment for pediatric-onset MS.

Only a few reports of PML exist in the pediatric population with MS.¹⁴⁷ As PML is the result of reactivation of a primary, usually asymptomatic infection with the JC virus, children may be at lower risk for this condition, as long as JC virus infection has not yet occurred.¹⁴⁷ Another reason may be that the number of children with MS treated with natalizumab is possibly too low to draw any significant risk estimates, as the safety and efficacy of natalizumab in children and adolescents has not been established.¹⁴⁵

Comorbidities

Comorbidities are common in people with MS and are associated with higher relapse rates, greater physical and cognitive impairments, lower HRQoL, and increased mortality.¹⁴⁸ Autoimmune comorbidities may pose particular challenges for people with MS, especially when a DMT does not successfully treat both the MS and the comorbid disease, or may even exacerbate the latter, as seen with psoriasis.¹⁴⁹ However, natalizumab may be a viable treatment option. In a retrospective analysis of 18 people with MS and comorbid psoriasis, who were switched from other DMTs due to lack of treatment efficacy for MS or worsening or development of psoriasis, improvement in both MS and psoriasis was observed after switching to natalizumab from other DMTs.¹⁴⁹

Another autoimmune disease that shares comorbidity with MS is inflammatory bowel disease, including Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, due to their common epidemiological and immunological patterns.^150,151 In the U.S., natalizumab is indicated for the treatment of Crohn’s disease as well as MS, so it could be used to treat individuals with both conditions.⁴³ People with Crohn’s disease have shown improvements in randomized controlled trials.^152,153

A comorbidity that can complicate treatment decisions in MS is liver disease due to the risk of drug-induced liver injury.¹⁵⁴ However, a case report has described natalizumab with ursodeoxycholic acid as being used successfully in a person with comorbid progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis type-3 after other DMTs were tried and associated with drug-induced liver injury.¹⁵⁴

Cardiovascular comorbidities are associated with the risk of MS progression. An observational, prospective cohort study in people with RRMS suggested that natalizumab treatment had a beneficial effect on lipid profile and increased uric acid levels during 12.9 ± 6.2 months of treatment; subsequent association with disease outcomes is unknown but of interest,¹⁵⁵ though increased uric acid levels have previously been associated with reduced risk of relapse and disease disability.¹⁵⁶ Taken together, natalizumab is approved as an effective treatment for MS and Crohn’s disease and may show beneficial effects in people with MS who have other comorbidities.

What have we learned from natalizumab and what does the future hold?

As the first monoclonal antibody to be approved for the treatment of MS, 20 years of natalizumab use has brought much to the MS community.¹ It has a unique mode of action⁶ that, although likely to contribute to the increased risk of PML,⁸⁸ is also responsible for its efficacy and unique properties of rapid onset of action and reversibility, the latter of which avoids long-term immunosuppression.^57,64 These properties, and natalizumab’s attractive overall risk/benefit profile, may make it an option for people who are complex to treat, including those in need of rapid onset of treatment effects, those who are pregnant or breastfeeding, children with MS, and people with MS with comorbidities. Over 20 years of experience with natalizumab has not only increased our understanding of the different MS treatment strategies involving the use of this agent and the types of people that are likely to derive the most benefit, but it also increased our understanding of the immunology of the disease itself, along with some of the first robust risk management strategies in MS. As the diagnostic criteria for MS evolves to improve early diagnosis, early use of HET, including natalizumab, will become increasingly important in managing the disease.

The definition of “rapidly evolving severe MS” resulted from post hoc analyses of large clinical trials to identify people who might benefit from early treatment with moderately high-efficacy drugs or HET.¹⁵⁷ As well as the introduction of a new therapeutic strategy for the treatment of MS, the modulation of immune cell trafficking across the BBB is an example of reverse translational medicine.¹⁵⁸ Data from clinical trials of natalizumab and fingolimod have revealed the involvement of different compartments in relapsing versus non-relapsing MS immune biology and contributed to our understanding of CNS immune surveillance.¹⁵⁸

In addition to paving the way for new therapeutic approaches for the management of MS as the first high-efficacy monoclonal antibody therapy,¹⁵⁹ natalizumab was also “ahead of the curve” in terms of the management of AEs. The risk of PML associated with natalizumab led to the development of the first structured risk management plan in MS treatment, allowing for individualization and risk stratification, which has been successful in reducing the incidence of PML over time.^8,95 Looking forward, further progress is expected in understanding why some at-risk people do not develop PML, particularly the role of genetics in individual PML risk.¹⁶⁰

Finally, natalizumab may have potential in other indications beyond MS. For example, natalizumab has been tested as a treatment for metastatic osteosarcoma (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03811886). As metastatic cancers use the VLA-4–VCAM-1 interaction to spread to the lung and other sites, anti-α4 integrin inhibitors, such as natalizumab, may reduce the risk of these cancers spreading.¹⁶¹ Moreover, in the authors’ opinion, natalizumab may have the potential to treat CNS complications associated with cancer immunotherapies. First, checkpoint inhibitors can be associated with neurological immune-related AEs due to upregulated activity of the immune system, where these people are generally responsive to immune-modulating therapy.¹⁶² Second, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy can result in immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome due to the diffusion of cytokines and transmigration of CAR T cells, endogenous T cells, and monocytes into the cerebrospinal fluid and CNS.¹⁶³ In addition, the authors also suggest that natalizumab may have application in other CNS complications such as tuberculosis meningitis, which is underpinned by BBB dysfunction and the influx of leukocytes into the CNS.¹⁶⁴ Taken together, there is the potential to bring 20 years of experience with natalizumab in MS to new therapy areas.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Medical writing support, under the guidance of the authors, was provided by Holly Oates, PhD, CMC Connect, a division of IPG Health Medical Communications, and was funded by Sandoz, in accordance with Good Publication Practice (GPP 2022) guidelines.

Declarations

ORCID iDs

Luisa Klotz

Thomas Berger

Jan Lycke

Celia Oreja-Guevara

Filipe Palavra

References

Barnes

The first monoclonal antibody therapy, https://www.nature.com/articles/d42859-018-00024-6 (2018, accessed 13 February 2025).

Pardo

Jones

DE.

The sequence of disease-modifying therapies in relapsing multiple sclerosis: safety and immunologic considerations. J Neurol 2017; 264: 2351–2374.

Montalban

Gold

Thompson

, et al. ECTRIMS/EAN guideline on the pharmacological treatment of people with multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 2018; 25: 215–237.

Butzkueven

Kappos

Wiendl

, et al. Long-term safety and effectiveness of natalizumab treatment in clinical practice: 10 years of real-world data from the Tysabri Observational Program (TOP). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2020; 91: 660–668.

Fernández

Oreja-Guevara

Arroyo

, et al. Natalizumab treatment of multiple sclerosis in Spain: results of an extensive observational study. J Neurol 2012; 259: 1814–1823.

Yang

Rempe

Whitmire

, et al. Therapeutic advances in multiple sclerosis. Front Neurol 2022; 13: 824926.

Planas

Martin

Sospedra

Long-term safety and efficacy of natalizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: impact on quality of life. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 2014; 5: 25–33.

Vukusic

Rollot

Casey

, et al. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy incidence and risk stratification among natalizumab users in France. JAMA Neurol 2020; 77: 94–102.

European Medicines Agency. Tyruko summary of product characteristics, https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/tyruko-epar-product-information_en.pdf (2023, accessed 13 February 2025).

10.

US Food and Drug Administration. Tyruko (natalizumab-sztn) injection, for intravenous use, full prescribing information, https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2023/761322s000lbl.pdf (2023, accessed 13 February 2025).

11.

Selmaj

Roth

Hofler

, et al. Introducing the biosimilar paradigm to neurology: the totality of evidence for the first biosimilar natalizumab. BioDrugs 2024; 38: 755–767.

12.

Goh

Gupta

, et al. Budget impact analysis of biosimilar natalizumab in the US. Am J Manag Care 2024; 30: e191–e197.

13.

Hutchinson

Natalizumab: a new treatment for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2007; 3: 259–268.

14.

Filippi

Bar-Or

Piehl

, et al. Multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2018; 4: 43.

15.

Charabati

Wheeler

Weiner

, et al. Multiple sclerosis: neuroimmune crosstalk and therapeutic targeting. Cell 2023; 186: 1309–1327.

16.

Younger

DS.

Multiple sclerosis: motor dysfunction. Handb Clin Neurol 2023; 196: 119–147.

17.

Scherder

Kant

Wolf

, et al. Sensory function and chronic pain in multiple sclerosis. Pain Res Manag 2018; 2018: 1924174.

18.

Serra

Chisari

Matta

Eye movement abnormalities in multiple sclerosis: pathogenesis, modeling, and treatment. Front Neurol 2018; 9: 31.

19.

Merson

Rolnick

MI.

Speech-language pathology and dysphagia in multiple sclerosis. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 1998; 9: 631–641.

20.

Preziosi

Gordon-Dixon

Emmanuel

Neurogenic bowel dysfunction in patients with multiple sclerosis: prevalence, impact, and management strategies. Degener Neurol Neuromuscul Dis 2018; 8: 79–90.

21.

Tornic

Panicker

JN.

The management of lower urinary tract dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2018; 18: 54.

22.

Haki

Al-Biati

Al-Tameemi

, et al. Review of multiple sclerosis: epidemiology, etiology, pathophysiology, and treatment. Medicine (Baltimore) 2024; 103: e37297.

23.

Alroughani

Boyko

Pediatric multiple sclerosis: a review. BMC Neurol 2018; 18: 27.

24.

Multiple Sclerosis News Today. ECTRIMS2024: McDonald criteria changes could speed diagnoses, https://multiplesclerosisnewstoday.com/news-posts/2024/09/25/ectrims-2024-mcdonald-criteria-changes-speed-diagnoses/ (2024, accessed 22 January 2025).

25.

Klineova

Lublin

FD.

Clinical course of multiple sclerosis. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 2018; 8: a028928.

26.

Kappos

Wolinsky

Giovannoni

, et al. Contribution of relapse-independent progression vs relapse-associated worsening to overall confirmed disability accumulation in typical relapsing multiple sclerosis in a pooled analysis of 2 randomized clinical trials. JAMA Neurol 2020; 77: 1132–1140.

27.

Lublin

Häring

Ganjgahi

, et al. How patients with multiple sclerosis acquire disability. Brain 2022; 145: 3147–3161.

28.

Tsantes

Curti

Collura

, et al. Five- and seven-year prognostic value of new effectiveness measures (NEDA, MEDA and six-month delayed NEDA) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 2020; 414: 116827.

29.

Havrdova

Galetta

Hutchinson

, et al. Effect of natalizumab on clinical and radiological disease activity in multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of the Natalizumab Safety and Efficacy in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (AFFIRM) study. Lancet Neurol 2009; 8: 254–260.

30.

Amin

Hersh

CM.

Updates and advances in multiple sclerosis neurotherapeutics. Neurodegener Dis Manag 2023; 13: 47–70.

31.

Multiple Sclerosis Association of America. The FDA-approved long-term treatments for MS, https://mymsaa.org/ms-information/treatments/long-term/ (2025, accessed 22 January 2025).

32.

MS Society. Disease-modifying therapies, https://www.mssociety.org.uk/living-with-ms/treatments-and-therapies/disease-modifying-therapies (2022, accessed 22 January 2025).

33.

Piehl

Current and emerging disease-modulatory therapies and treatment targets for multiple sclerosis. J Intern Med 2021; 289: 771–791.

34.

Stankiewicz

Weiner

HL.

An argument for broad use of high efficacy treatments in early multiple sclerosis. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2019; 7: e636.

35.

Casanova

Quintanilla-Bordás

and Gascón

Escalation

vs.

early intense therapy in multiple sclerosis. J Pers Med 2022; 12: 119.

36.

Ziemssen

Derfuss

de Stefano

, et al. Optimizing treatment success in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 2016; 263: 1053–1065.

37.

Spelman

Magyari

Piehl

, et al. Treatment escalation vs immediate initiation of highly effective treatment for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: data from 2 different national strategies. JAMA Neurol 2021; 78: 1197–1204.

38.

Merkel

Brown

JWL

, et al. Timing of high-efficacy therapy for multiple sclerosis: a retrospective observational cohort study. Lancet Neurol 2020; 19: 307–316.

39.

Simpson

Mowry

Newsome

SD.

Early aggressive treatment approaches for multiple sclerosis. Curr Treat Options Neurol 2021; 23: 19.

40.

Butzkueven

Kalincik

Patti

, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes in patients with multiple sclerosis who are initiating disease-modifying therapy with natalizumab compared with BRACETD first-line therapies. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 2024; 17: 17562864231221331.

41.

Giovannoni

Marta

Davis

, et al. Switching patients at high risk of PML from natalizumab to another disease-modifying therapy. Pract Neurol 2016; 16: 389–393.

42.

Sheremata

Minagar

Alexander

, et al. The role of alpha-4 integrin in the aetiology of multiple sclerosis: current knowledge and therapeutic implications. CNS Drugs 2005; 19: 909–922.

43.

US Food and Drug Administration. Tysabri (natalizumab) injection full prescribing information, https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/125104s0576lbl.pdf (2004, accessed 13 February 2025).

44.

European Medicines Agency. Tysabri summary of product characteristics, https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/tysabri-epar-product-information_en.pdf (2006, accessed 13 February 2025).

45.

World Health Organization. WHO expert committee on biological standardization. Annex 2. Guidelines on evaluation of similar biotherapeutic products (SBPs), https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/biologicals/trs_977_annex_2.pdf?sfvrsn=e2389a69_3 (2013, accessed 13 February 2025).

46.

Rudick

Sandrock

Natalizumab: alpha 4-integrin antagonist selective adhesion molecule inhibitors for MS. Expert Rev Neurother 2004; 4: 571–580.

47.

Tubridy

Behan

Capildeo

, et al The effect of anti-alpha4 integrin antibody on brain lesion activity in MS. The UK Antegren Study Group. Neurology 1999; 53: 466–472.

48.

Bayless

Meininger

Scholtz

, et al. Osteopontin is a ligand for the alpha4beta1 integrin. J Cell Sci 1998; 111(Pt 9): 1165–1174.

49.

Tchilian

Owen

JJT

Jenkinson

EJ.

Anti-alpha 4 integrin antibody induces apoptosis in murine thymocytes and staphylococcal enterotoxin B-activated lymph node T cells. Immunology 1997; 92: 321–327.

50.

Sucksdorff

Tuisku

Matilainen

, et al. Natalizumab treatment reduces microglial activation in the white matter of the MS brain. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2019; 6: e574.

51.

Ramos-Cejudo

Oreja-Guevara

Stark

Aroeira L

, et al. Treatment with natalizumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients induces changes in inflammatory mechanism. J Clin Immunol 2011; 31: 623–631.

52.

Liampas

Tseriotis

V-S

Mavridis

, et al. Effects of natalizumab on oligoclonal bands in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurol Sci 2025; 46: 1541–1553.

53.

Polman

O’Connor

Havrdova

, et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 899–910.

54.

Rudick

Stuart

Calabresi

, et al. Natalizumab plus interferon beta-1a for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 911–923.

55.

Morrow

Clift

Devonshire

, et al. Use of natalizumab in persons with multiple sclerosis: 2022 update. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2022; 65: 103995.

56.

O’Connor

Goodman

Willmer-Hulme

, et al. Randomized multicenter trial of natalizumab in acute MS relapses: clinical and MRI effects. Neurology 2004; 62: 2038–2043.

57.

Kappos

O’Connor

Polman

, et al. Clinical effects of natalizumab on multiple sclerosis appear early in treatment course. J Neurol 2013; 260: 1388–1395.

58.

Butzkueven

Licata

Jeffery

, et al. Natalizumab versus fingolimod for patients with active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: results from REVEAL, a prospective, randomised head-to-head study. BMJ Open 2020; 10: e038861.

59.

Hersh

Pang

Miller

, et al. Comparison of time to clinically meaningful improvement in quality of life in neurological disorders in patients treated with natalizumab versus ocrelizumab. Neurodegener Dis Manag 2024; 14: 21–33.

60.

Montalban

Hauser

Kappos

, et al. Ocrelizumab versus placebo in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2017; 376: 209–220.

61.

Hauser

Bar-Or

Cohen

, et al. Ofatumumab versus teriflunomide in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2020; 383: 546–557.

62.

Bar-Or

Wiendl

Montalban

, et al. Rapid and sustained B-cell depletion with subcutaneous ofatumumab in relapsing multiple sclerosis: APLIOS, a randomized phase-2 study. Mult Scler 2022; 28: 910–924.

63.

Hauser

Waubant

Arnold

, et al. B-cell depletion with rituximab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 676–688.

64.

Plavina

Muralidharan

Kuesters

, et al. Reversibility of the effects of natalizumab on peripheral immune cell dynamics in MS patients. Neurology 2017; 89: 1584–1593.

65.

Derfuss

Mehling

Papadopoulou

, et al. Advances in oral immunomodulating therapies in relapsing multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2020; 19: 336–347.

66.

Monschein

Dekany

Zrzavy

, et al. Real-world use of natalizumab in Austria: data from the Austrian Multiple Sclerosis Treatment Registry (AMSTR). J Neurol 2023; 270: 3779–3786.

67.

Cree

BAC

Cohen

Reder

, et al. Disability improvement as a clinically relevant outcome in clinical trials of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2021; 27: 2219–2231.

68.

Phillips

Giovannoni

Lublin

, et al. Sustained improvement in Expanded Disability Status Scale as a new efficacy measure of neurological change in multiple sclerosis: treatment effects with natalizumab in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2011; 17: 970–979.

69.

Wiendl

Spelman

Butzkueven

, et al. Real-world disability improvement in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab in the Tysabri Observational Program. Mult Scler 2021; 27: 719–728.

70.

Buron

Christensen

Pontieri

, et al. Natalizumab treatment of multiple sclerosis—a Danish nationwide study with 13 years of follow-up. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2023; 74: 104713.

71.

Dalton

Miszkiel

Barker

, et al. Effect of natalizumab on conversion of gadolinium enhancing lesions to T1 hypointense lesions in relapsing multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 2004; 251: 407–413.

72.

Gunnarsson

Malmeström

Axelsson

, et al. Axonal damage in relapsing multiple sclerosis is markedly reduced by natalizumab. Ann Neurol 2010; 69: 83–89.

73.

Planche

Moisset

Morello

, et al. Improvement of quality of life and its relationship with neuropsychiatric outcomes in patients with multiple sclerosis starting treatment with natalizumab: a 3-year follow-up multicentric study. J Neurol Sci 2017; 382: 148–154.

74.

Rudick

Miller

Hass

, et al. Health-related quality of life in multiple sclerosis: effects of natalizumab. Ann Neurol 2007; 62: 335–346.

75.

Perumal

Balabanov

, et al. Improvements in cognitive processing speed, disability, and patient-reported outcomes in patients with early relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab: results of a 4-year, real-world, open-label study. CNS Drugs 2022; 36: 977–993.

76.

Stephenson

Kern

Agarwal

, et al. Impact of natalizumab on patient-reported outcomes in multiple sclerosis: a longitudinal study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2012; 10: 155.

77.

Penner

Sivertsdotter

Celius

, et al. Improvement in fatigue during natalizumab treatment is linked to improvement in depression and day-time sleepiness. Front Neurol 2015; 6: 18.

78.

Cohen

Mondot

Bucciarelli

, et al. BEST-MS: a prospective head-to-head comparative study of natalizumab and fingolimod in active relapsing MS. Mult Scler 2021; 27: 1556–1563.

79.

Guerra

Caputo

Orlando

, et al. Long-term comparative analysis of no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3) status between multiple sclerosis patients treated with natalizumab and fingolimod for up to 4 years. Neurol Sci 2021; 42: 4647–4655.

80.

Rollot

Couturier

Casey

, et al. Comparative effectiveness of natalizumab versus anti-CD20 in highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis after fingolimod withdrawal. Neurotherapeutics 2022; 19: 476–490.

81.

Roos

Sharmin

Malpas

, et al. Effectiveness of cladribine compared to fingolimod, natalizumab, ocrelizumab and alemtuzumab in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2024; 30: 1163–1175.

82.

Haggiag

Prosperini

Galgani

, et al. Extratemporal herpes encephalitis during natalizumab treatment: a case report. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2016; 10: 134–136.

83.

Kwiatkowski

Gallois

Bilbault

, et al. Herpes encephalitis during natalizumab treatment in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2012; 18: 909–911.

84.

Sharma

Ballham

Inglis

KEA

, et al. Does natalizumab treatment increase the risk of herpes simplex encephalitis in multiple sclerosis? Case and discussion. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2013; 2: 385–387.

85.

Ciano-Petersen

Aliaga-Gaspar

Hurtado-Guerrero

, et al. Natalizumab-immunogenicity evaluation in patients with infusion related events or disease exacerbations. Front Immunol 2023; 14: 1242508.

86.

Link

Ramanujam

Auer

, et al. Clinical practice of analysis of anti-drug antibodies against interferon beta and natalizumab in multiple sclerosis patients in Europe: a descriptive study of test results. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0170395.

87.

Clerico

Artusi

Di Liberto

, et al. Long-term safety evaluation of natalizumab for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2017; 16: 963–972.

88.

Major

Yousry

Clifford

DB.

Pathogenesis of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy and risks associated with treatments for multiple sclerosis: a decade of lessons learned. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17: 467–480.

89.

Cortese

Reich

Nath

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy and the spectrum of JC virus-related disease. Nat Rev Neurol 2021; 17: 37–51.

90.

Vivekanandan

Abubacker

Myneni

, et al. Risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in multiple sclerosis patient treated with natalizumab: a systematic review. Cureus 2021; 13: e14764.

91.

Clifford

De Luca

Simpson

, et al. Natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in patients with multiple sclerosis: lessons from 28 cases. Lancet Neurol 2010; 9: 438–446.

92.

Berger

Aksamit

Clifford

, et al. PML diagnostic criteria: consensus statement from the AAN neuroinfectious disease section. Neurology 2013; 80: 1430–1438.

93.

Kelsey

The risk of natalizumab-associated PML is revealed, https://www.nature.com/articles/d42859-018-00025-5 (2018, 20 February 2025).

94.

US Food and Drug Administration. Tysabri (natalizumab) label, https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2006/125104s015LBL.pdf (2006, accessed 13 February 2025).

95.

Kågström

Fält

Berglund

, et al. Reduction of the risk of PML in natalizumab treated MS patients in Sweden: an effect of improved PML risk surveillance. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2021; 50: 102842.

96.

Biogen. PML risk estimates algorithm, https://biogenlinc.co.uk/products/ms-portfolio/tysabri/pml/ (2023, accessed 13 February 2025).

97.

Koendgen

Campbell

, et al. Risk of natalizumab-associated progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy in patients with multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of data from four clinical studies. Lancet Neurol 2017; 16: 925–933.

98.

Giovannoni

Barts-MS PML risk guide, https://msselfie.co.uk/dmts-safety/natalizumab-pml/attachment/barts-ms-pml-risk-guide-table-simplified_27-06-23/ (2023, accessed 13 February 2025).

99.

Perncezky

Sellner

Natalizumab extended-interval dosing in multiple sclerosis to mitigate progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy risk: initial study evidence and real-world experience. J Cent Nerv Syst Dis 2022; 14: 11795735221135485.

100.

Ryerson

Foley

Chang

, et al. Risk of natalizumab-associated PML in patients with MS is reduced with extended interval dosing. Neurology 2019; 93: e1452–e1462.

101.

De Mercanti

Signori

Cordioli

, et al. MRI activity and extended interval of natalizumab dosing regimen: a multicentre Italian study. J Neurol Sci 2021; 424: 117385.

102.

Jeantin

Boudot de la

Motte M

Deschamps

, et al. Natalizumab extended-interval dosing in a real-life setting. J Neurol Sci 2023; 450: 120689.

103.

Ryerson

Foley

Defer

, et al. Exploratory clinical efficacy and patient-reported outcomes from NOVA: a randomized controlled study of intravenous natalizumab 6-week dosing versus continued 4-week dosing for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2023; 72: 104561.

104.

Johnsson

Farman

Blennow

, et al. No increase of serum neurofilament light in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients switching from standard to extended-interval dosing of natalizumab. Mult Scler 2022; 28: 2070–2080.

105.

Zanghì

Gallo

Avolio

, et al. Exit strategies in natalizumab-treated RRMS at high risk of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy: a multicentre comparison study. Neurotherapeutics 2021; 18: 1166–1174.

106.

Salhofer-Polanyi

Baumgartner

Kraus

, et al. What to expect after natalizumab cessation in a real-life setting. Acta Neurol Scand 2014; 130: 97–102.

107.

Hartung

Mares

Meuth

, et al. Multiple sclerosis: switching from natalizumab to other high-efficacy treatments to mitigate progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy risk. Neurotherapeutics 2021; 18: 1654–1656.

108.

Brown

Muston

Massey

Switching from natalizumab to an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: a systematic review. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2024; 86: 105605.

109.

Bigaut

Kremer

Fabacher

, et al. Ocrelizumab versus fingolimod after natalizumab cessation in multiple sclerosis: an observational study. J Neurol 2022; 269: 3295–3300.

110.

Gold

Schmidt

Deisenhammer

, et al. Real-world evidence and patient preference for subcutaneous versus intravenous natalizumab in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis—initial results from the observational SISTER study. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 2024; 17: 17562864241241382.

111.

Trojano

Ramió-Torrentà

Grimaldi

, et al. A randomized study of natalizumab dosing regimens for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2021; 27: 2240–2253.

112.

Plavina

Fox

Lucas

, et al. A randomized trial evaluating various administration routes of natalizumab in multiple sclerosis. J Clin Pharmacol 2016; 56: 1254–1262.

113.

Mariottini

Mealli

Mattei

, et al. Comparative efficacy of subcutaneous versus intravenous natalizumab on annualized relapse rate: a post-hoc analysis of the REFINE study. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2024; 91: 105852.

114.

Gelissen

LMY

Loveless

Toorop

, et al. Subcutaneous administration of natalizumab can lead to lower drug concentrations compared to intravenous administration. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2024; 90: 105796.

115.

Toorop

van Kempen

ZLE

Steenhuis

, et al. Decrease of natalizumab drug levels after switching from intravenous to subcutaneous administration in patients with multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2023; 94: 482–486.

116.

Ruggieri

Ianniello

Copetti

, et al. Treatment modifiers across different regimens of natalizumab treatment in MS: an Italian real-world experience. Neurotherapeutics 2024; 21: e00338.

117.

Filippi

Grimaldi

Conte

, et al. Intravenous or subcutaneous natalizumab in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: investigation on efficiency and savings—the EASIER study. J Neurol 2024; 271: 340–354.

118.

Signoriello

Signori

Lus

, et al. NEDA-3 achievement in early highly active relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis patients treated with ocrelizumab or natalizumab. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2024; 87: 105594.

119.

Rojas

Carnero

Contentti E

Alonso

, et al. Burden of treatment and quality of life in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis patients under early high efficacy therapy in Argentina: data from the Argentinean registry. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2024; 85: 105543.

120.

Guger

Enzinger

Leutmezer

, et al. Early intensive versus escalation treatment in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Austria. J Neurol 2024; 271: 3142–3152.

121.

Spelman

Horakova

Ozakbas

, et al. Switching to natalizumab or fingolimod in multiple sclerosis: comparative effectiveness and effect of pre-switch disease activity. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2023; 70: 104477.

122.

Zhu

Zhou

Roos

, et al. Comparing switch to ocrelizumab, cladribine or natalizumab after fingolimod treatment cessation in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2022; 93: 1330–1337.

123.

Carvajal

Zabalza

Carbonell-Mirabent

, et al. Vaccine safety and immunogenicity in patients with multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7: e246345.

124.

Schuckmann

Steffen

Zipp

, et al. Impact of extended interval dosing of ocrelizumab on immunoglobulin levels in multiple sclerosis. Med 2023; 4: 361–372.e363.

125.

Krajnc

Bsteh

Berger

, et al. Monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis: an overview with emphasis on pregnancy, vaccination, and risk management. Neurotherapeutics 2022; 19: 753–773.

126.

Bar-Or

Calkwood

Chognot

, et al. Effect of ocrelizumab on vaccine responses in patients with multiple sclerosis: the VELOCE study. Neurology 2020; 95: e1999–e2008.

127.

Sormani

Inglese

Schiavetti

, et al. Effect of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in MS patients treated with disease modifying therapies. EBioMedicine 2021; 72: 103581.

128.

Paybast

Nahayati

Shahmohammadi

, et al. Is it time to consider the live attenuated varicella-zoster virus (VZV) vaccination safe in patients with multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab? An extension study of the first Iranian experience. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2025; 95: 106285.

129.

Huttner

Eperon

Lascano

, et al. Risk of MS relapse after yellow fever vaccination: a self-controlled case series. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2020; 7: e726.

130.

Papeix

Mazoyer

Maillart

, et al. Multiple sclerosis: is there a risk of worsening after yellow fever vaccination? Mult Scler 2021; 27: 2280–2283.

131.

Miauton

Tan

Pantazou

, et al. Vaccine-associated measles in a patient treated with natalizumab: a case report. BMC Infect Dis 2020; 20: 753.

132.

O’Connor

Goodman

Kappos

, et al. Long-term safety and effectiveness of natalizumab redosing and treatment in the STRATA MS study. Neurology 2014; 83: 78–86.

133.

Kanakura

Kihara

Kinoshita

, et al. Switching disease-modifying therapies from sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators to natalizumab or dimethyl fumarate restores immune responses after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination in patients with multiple sclerosis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2024; 243: 108378.

134.

Thiel

Litvin

Haben

, et al. Disease activity and neonatal outcomes after exposure to natalizumab throughout pregnancy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2024; 95: 561–570.

135.

Landi

Bovis

Grimaldi

, et al Exposure to natalizumab throughout pregnancy: effectiveness and safety in an Italian cohort of women with multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2022; 93: 1306–1316.

136.

Oreja-Guevara

Tintoré

Meca

, et al. Family planning in fertile-age patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) (ConPlanEM Study): Delphi consensus statements. Cureus 2023; 15: e44056.

137.

Graber

Panchaud

Legardeur

, et al. Recommendations for the treatment of multiple sclerosis in family planning, pregnancy and lactation in Switzerland: immunotherapy. Clin Transl Neurosci 2024; 8: 26.

138.

O’Leary

Brugger

Wallentine

, et al. Practical clinical guidelines for natalizumab treatment in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. J Infus Nurs 2023; 46: 347–359.

139.

Proschmann

Haase

Inojosa

, et al. Drug and neurofilament levels in serum and breastmilk of women with multiple sclerosis exposed to natalizumab during pregnancy and lactation. Front Immunol 2021; 12: 715195.

140.

de Chalus

Taveira

Deiva

. Pediatric onset multiple sclerosis: future challenge for early diagnosis and treatment. Presse Med 2021; 50: 104069.

141.

Gorman

Healy

Polgar-Turcsanyi

, et al. Increased relapse rate in pediatric-onset compared with adult-onset multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 2009; 66: 54–59.

142.

Ghezzi

Old and new strategies in the treatment of pediatric multiple sclerosis: a personal view for a new treatment approach. Neurol Ther 2024; 13: 949–963.

143.

Arnal-Garcia

García-Montero

Málaga

, et al. Natalizumab use in pediatric patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Eur J Paediatr Neurol 2013; 17: 50–54.

144.

Ghezzi

Moiola

Pozzilli

, et al. Natalizumab in the pediatric MS population: results of the Italian registry. BMC Neurol 2015; 15: 174.

145.

Palavra

Figueiroa

Correia

, et al. TyPed study: natalizumab for the treatment of pediatric-onset multiple sclerosis in Portugal. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2021; 51: 102865.

146.

Puthenparampil

Gaggiola

Ponzano

, et al. High NEDA and no PIRA in natalizumab-treated patients with pediatric-onset multiple sclerosis. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2024; 11: e200303.

147.

Yeh

Weinstock-Guttman

Natalizumab in pediatric multiple sclerosis patients. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 2010; 3: 293–299.

148.

Marrie

Fisk

Fitzgerald

, et al. Etiology, effects and management of comorbidities in multiple sclerosis: recent advances. Front Immunol 2023; 14: 1197195.

149.

Berkovich

Yakupova

Eskenazi

, et al. Improvement of comorbid psoriasis in patients with MS treated with natalizumab. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2021; 8: e961.

150.

Kosmidou

Katsanos

, et al. Multiple sclerosis and inflammatory bowel diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol 2017; 264: 254–259.

151.

Wang

Wan

Wang

, et al. Multiple sclerosis and inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 2022; 9: 132–140.

152.

Ghosh

Goldin

Gordon

, et al. Natalizumab for active Crohn’s disease. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 24–32.

153.

Nelson

SML

Nguyen

McDonald

JWD

, et al. Natalizumab for induction of remission in Crohn’s disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 8: CD006097.

154.

De Masi

Orlando

De Donno

. Progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis type-3 and multiple sclerosis: lessons from comorbidity. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 2019; 6: 2347–2350.

155.

Moccia

Albero

Lanzillo

, et al. Cardiovascular profile improvement during natalizumab treatment. Metab Brain Dis 2018; 33: 981–986.

156.

Moccia

Lanzillo

Costabile

, et al. Uric acid in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a 2-year longitudinal study. J Neurol 2015; 262: 961–967.

157.

Fernández

. Is there a change of paradigm towards more effective treatment early in the course of apparent high-risk MS? Mult Scler Relat Disord 2017; 17: 75–83.

158.

Schwab

Wiendl

Learning CNS immunopathology from therapeutic interventions. Sci Transl Med 2023; 15: eadg7863.

159.

Cree

BAC

Oksenberg

Hauser

SL.

Multiple sclerosis: two decades of progress. Lancet Neurol 2022; 21: 211–214.

160.

Hatchwell

Smith

3rd Jalilzadeh

, et al. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy genetic risk variants for pharmacovigilance of immunosuppressant therapies. Front Neurol 2022; 13: 1016377.

161.

Chen

Massague

Molecular pathways: VCAM-1 as a potential therapeutic target in metastasis. Clin Cancer Res 2012; 18: 5520–5525.

162.

Fan

Ren

Zhao

, et al. Neurological immune-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a review of the literature. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol 2020; 16: 291–298.

163.

Morris

Neelapu

Giavridis

, et al. Cytokine release syndrome and associated neurotoxicity in cancer immunotherapy. Nat Rev Immunol 2022; 22: 85–96.

164.

Barnacle

Davis

Wilkinson

RJ.

Recent advances in understanding the human host immune response in tuberculous meningitis. Front Immunol 2024; 14: 1326651.

Twenty years of natalizumab in multiple sclerosis: lessons learned and future outlook

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Natalizumab: Mode of action

Unique properties and clinical impact of natalizumab

Rapid onset of action

Reversibility

Long-term clinical effectiveness

Health-related QoL improvements

Comparisons with other HETs

Safety and tolerability of natalizumab

Long-term safety and tolerability

Anti-natalizumab antibodies

PML risk management

Exit strategies in people with high PML risk

Practical guidance on the clinical use of natalizumab

Treatment strategies

IV and subcutaneous administrations

Early use

Switching to natalizumab from lower-efficacy therapies or other HETs

Vaccination and bridging therapy

Use of natalizumab in specific populations

Pregnancy and breastfeeding

Pediatric-onset MS

Comorbidities

What have we learned from natalizumab and what does the future hold?

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Declarations

ORCID iDs

References