Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15549357›Full record

ReviewJournal of neurology2004

Alternatives to current disease-modifying treatment in MS: what do we need and what can we expect in the future?

Ludwig Kappos, Jens Kuhle, Achim Gass, Lutz Achtnichts, Ernst-Wilhelm Radue

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neurology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Developing therapeutics for the treatment of multiple sclerosis.NeuroRx : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2005
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ludwig KapposDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital, Kantonsspital, 4031, Basel, Switzerland. lkappos@uhbs.ch
Jens Kuhle
Achim Gass
Lutz Achtnichts
Ernst-Wilhelm Radue
Kantonsspital Baselland · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) are now widely available, and their beneficial effects on relapse rates, magnetic resonance imaging outcomes and, in some cases, relapse-related disability have been shown in numerous clinical studies. However, as these treatments are only partially effective in halting the MS disease process, the search for improved treatment regimens and novel therapies must continue. Strategies to improve our therapeutic armamentarium have to take into account the different phases or parts of the pathogenesis of the disease. Available treatments address systemic immune dysfunction, blood-brain barrier permeability and the inflammatory process in the central nervous system. Currently, patients who fail to respond adequately to first-line DMTs are often considered as candidates for intensive immunosuppression with cytostatic agents or even autologous stem cell transplantation. However, new approaches are being developed. Combination therapies offer an alternative approach that may have considerable potential to improve therapeutic yield and, although likely to present considerable challenges in terms of trial design, this certainly seems to be a logical step forward in view of the complex pathology of MS. Several new drugs are also being developed with the aim of providing more effective, convenient and/or specific modulation of the inflammatory component of the disease. These treatments include humanised monoclonal antibodies such as the anti-VLA-4 antibody natalizumab, inhibitors of intracellular activation, signalling pathways and T-cell proliferation, and oral immunomodulators such as sirolimus, teriflunomide or statins. There remains, however, an urgent need for treatments that protect against demyelination and axonal loss, or promote remyelination/regeneration. Due to the chronicity of MS, the therapeutic window for neuroprotective agents is wider than that following stroke or acute spinal cord injury, and may therefore allow the use of some drugs that have proven disappointing in other situations. Novel potential neuroprotective agents such as alpha-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid antagonists and ion-channel blockers will be entering Phase II trials in MS in the near future, and it is hoped that these agents will mark the start of a new era for DMTs for MS.

Indexed as

Adjuvants, ImmunologicAntibodies, MonoclonalCell ProliferationDrug Therapy, CombinationHumansInterferon-betaModels, BiologicalMultiple SclerosisNeuroprotective AgentsSignal TransductionT-LymphocytesAdjuvants, ImmunologicAntibodies, MonoclonalInterferon-betaNeuroprotective Agents

Identifiers

PMID15549357
OpenAlexW2096913648

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.