ArticleJournal of neurology2016
Lateral and escalation therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a comparative study.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-world effectiveness of horizontal switching between disease-modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of the MSBase Registry.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2025Article
- Personality Traits and Fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Effects of horizontal versus vertical switching of disease-modifying treatment after platform drugs on disease activity in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Austria.Journal of neurology · 2023Article
- Assessing 'no evidence of disease activity' status in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a long-term follow-up.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- InjectableNeural regeneration research · 2022Article
- Vitamin D and Depressive Symptoms in Adults with Multiple Sclerosis: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Exit Strategies in Natalizumab-Treated RRMS at High Risk of Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy: a Multicentre Comparison Study.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2021Observational
- Treatment escalation leads to fewer relapses compared with switching to another moderately effective therapy.Journal of neurology · 2019Observational
- Outcomes of Stable Multiple Sclerosis Patients Staying on Initial Interferon Beta Therapy Versus Switching to Another Interferon Beta Therapy: A US Claims Database Study.Advances in therapy · 2018Article
- Sequencing of high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis: perspectives and approaches.Neural regeneration research · 2018Review
- Interferons in the Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis: A Clinical Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability Update.International journal of MS careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Performing a therapeutic switch in MS is still a matter of debate. Objective of our study is to compare switching to another first-line therapy with switching to a second-line therapy in persons with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (pwRRMS). A retrospective analysis of data prospectively collected was performed. PwRRMS experiencing on-treatment disease activity were included. No clinical relapse, no sustained disability progression by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), and no radiological activity (new T2 and/or gadolinium-enhanced brain lesions) were used as indicators of no disease activity (NEDA 3). Time to reach the first relapse after switch and time to reach an EDSS of 4.0 were also evaluated. Ninety-one pwRRMS were enrolled. Forty-eight (52.7 %) were on lateral switch, and 43 (47.3 %) on escalation switch. At baseline, the two groups differed for T2 and T1 brain lesions number (higher in the escalation group, p < 0.005). The proportion of pwRRMS who were NEDA 3 after 24 months from the switch was similar in the two groups (20.8 % in lateral group and 18.6 % in escalation group). No difference in timing to reach the first relapse after switch and an EDSS of 4.0 were found. Therefore, in selected pwRRMS, lateral and escalation strategies showed similar efficacy in delaying MS progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.