Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25027264›Full record

ReviewCurrent neurology and neuroscience reports2014

Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders.

Eoin P Flanagan, Brian G Weinshenker

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. [Classic presentation of neuromyelitis optica: clinical case and review of the literature].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2024
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. A Clinical Approach to the Differential Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2015
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
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

2 authors.

Eoin P FlanaganDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Brian G Weinshenker

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the discovery of aquaporin 4-IgG, a sensitive and highly specific biomarker of neuromyelitis optica (NMO), a wide range of syndromes have been recognized as being associated with this condition. This observation has led to new proposed terminology for the entire disorder, NMO spectrum disorders (NMOSD). The discovery of a pathogenic autoantibody and its target antigen has also facilitated basic research into the immunopathogenesis of the disease. Key advances include establishment of passive transfer animal models demonstrating the pathogenic potential of the autoantibody and confirming an important role of complement suggested by immunopathology of NMO brain lesions and of B-cell subsets, plasmablasts in particular. These discoveries have led to phase 1 clinical trials of targeted immunotherapy with potential for improved efficacy and less toxicity than current empiric immunosuppressant medications used to treat NMOSD. Randomized clinical trials are beginning to assess the efficacy and safety of a variety of immunotherapies in NMOSD. Therapeutic options are likely to increase, and improved outcomes in NMOSD patients are anticipated.

Indexed as

AnimalsAquaporin 4HeadHumansImmunoglobulin GNeuromyelitis OpticaSpinal CordAquaporin 4Immunoglobulin G

Identifiers

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.