ArticleNeurology international2016
Injectable Disease Modifying Agents in Multiple Sclerosis: Pattern of Medication Use and Clinical Effectiveness.
Article in Neurology international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to assess long-term use, adherence and efficacy of injectable disease modifying agents (DMAs). Multiple Sclerosis (MS) patients diagnosed during 2002-2010 with early treatment start and at least one year in first choice medication were included in a large university district in Finland. Annualized relapse rates (ARR) during each treatment period were studied, and number of switches by medication evaluated. Use of health care facilities during 2002-2010 was assessed. In the study were included 113 MS patients; 15 (13%) switched medication. The mean duration of treatment period (128) was 3.8 years. In 77% (98/128) the treatment continued with the first DMA for (mean) 3.8 years, in 19% (25/128) with the second for 3.5 years and in 4% (5/128) with the third for 4.8 years. Mean ARR was 0.26, with 54% (69/128) of the periods relapse free. Mean ARR during the treatment periods with product switch was 0.41 before, and 0.28 after the switch, showing a trend towards better efficacy with the second DMA. The usage of health care resources remained within the guidelines. Long-term adherence to first choice DMA was observed, and a switch of product within the DMAs showed continuous adherence and efficacy. The efforts to seek a clinically effective and well tolerated agent within the first-line DMAs is warranted, leading to continued adherence and increased clinical effectiveness.
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.