Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25794777›Full record

ArticleCurrent treatment options in neurology2015

Therapeutic management of severe relapses in multiple sclerosis.

Carolyn Bevan, Jeffrey M Gelfand

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Current treatment options in neurology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Aggressive multiple sclerosis (2): Treatment.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Dietary Inflammatory Index and clinical course of multiple sclerosis.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carolyn BevanMS Center, Department of Neurology, University of California, 675 Nelson Rising Lane, Box 3206, San Francisco, CA, 94158-3206, USA.
Jeffrey M Gelfand
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

opinion statementWhile not all multiple sclerosis (MS) relapses require treatment, relapses that are bothersome or that impair function should prompt consideration of timely treatment to restore function and minimize disability. Patients with suspected MS relapses should be evaluated to confirm the diagnosis, exclude other causes of neurological dysfunction, and identify potential triggers for relapse or pseudo-relapse, such as urinary tract infections, fever, or metabolic derangements. The diagnosis of an MS relapse is clinical, but MRI may be useful for confirmation and to evaluate for multifocal disease activity. High-dose oral or intravenous glucocorticoids, with or without an oral taper, are first-line therapy for MS relapses. Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) provides an alternative to glucocorticoid treatment but is currently much more expensive and does not have proven superiority. If the acute neurological deficits remain severe after steroid treatment, and particularly if there is persistent abnormal contrast-enhancement of the symptomatic lesion on repeat MRI, plasma exchange (PLEX) should be considered as an acute rescue therapy for relapse. In exceptional cases, particularly fulminant or tumefactive disease that fails to improve following treatment with steroids and PLEX, cytoxic agents such as cyclophosphamide or B cell-depleting regimens such as rituximab may be considered, although risk must be carefully weighed and the kinetics of such regimens indicate that they probably serve more to accelerate remission of disease activity than as an immediate relapse remedy. A single dose of natalizumab given as acute therapy for MS relapse was shown not to improve clinical outcomes in a randomized controlled trial. Attention to symptom management and promotion of neurorehabilitation are important aspects of MS relapse care. Neuroprotective and neuroreparative therapies remain under investigation, but are likely to become important complementary elements of relapse therapy in the future. Relapses serve as important indicators of MS disease activity. In the context of the emerging treatment paradigm of targeting freedom from evidence of MS disease activity, relapses should prompt consideration of transitioning to a disease-modifying treatment that may offer better efficacy.

Identifiers

PMID25794777
OpenAlexW1977798434

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.