Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28429241›Full record

ReviewDrugs2017

Pharmacological Approaches to the Management of Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis.

A Nandoskar, J Raffel, A S Scalfari, T Friede, R S Nicholas

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Multiple Sclerosis.The New England journal of medicine · 2018
    Review
  7. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

A NandoskarWolfson Neuroscience Laboratories, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, 160 Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN, UK.
J RaffelWolfson Neuroscience Laboratories, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, 160 Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN, UK.
A S ScalfariWolfson Neuroscience Laboratories, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, 160 Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN, UK.
T FriedeDepartment of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Humboltallee 32, 37073, Göttingen, Germany.
R S NicholasWolfson Neuroscience Laboratories, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, 160 Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN, UK. r.nicholas@imperial.ac.uk.
Hammersmith Hospital · GBImperial College London · GBUniversitätsmedizin Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is well recognised that the majority of the impact of multiple sclerosis (MS), both personal and societal, arises in the progressive phase where disability accumulates inexorably. As such, progressive MS (PMS) has been the target of pharmacological therapies for many years. However, there are no current licensed treatments for PMS. This stands in marked contrast to relapsing remitting MS (RRMS) where trials have resulted in numerous licensed therapies. PMS has proven to be a more difficult challenge compared to RRMS and this review focuses on secondary progressive MS (SPMS), where relapses occur before the onset of gradual, irreversible disability, and not primary progressive MS where disability accumulation occurs without prior relapses. Although there are similarities between the two forms, in both cases pinpointing when PMS starts is difficult in a condition in which disability can vary from day to day. There is also an overlap between the pathology of relapsing and progressive MS and this has contributed to the lack of well-defined outcomes, both surrogates and clinically relevant outcomes in PMS. In this review, we used the search term 'randomised controlled clinical drug trials in secondary progressive MS' in publications since 1988 together with recently completed trials where results were available. We found 34 trials involving 21 different molecules, of which 38% were successful in reaching their primary outcome. In general, the trials were well designed (e.g. double blind) with sample sizes ranging from 35 to 1949 subjects. The majority were parallel group, but there were also multi-arm and multidose trials as well as the more recent use of adaptive designs. The disability outcome most commonly used was the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) in all phases, but also magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-measured brain atrophy has been utilised as a surrogate endpoint in phase II studies. The majority of the treatments tested in SPMS over the years were initially successful in RRMS. This has a number of implications in terms of targeting SPMS, but principally implies that the optimal strategy to target SPMS is to utilise the prodrome of relapses to initiate a therapy that will aim to both prevent progression and slow its accumulation. This approach is in agreement with the early targeting of MS but requires treatments that are both effective and safe if it is to be used before disability is a major problem. Recent successes will hopefully result in the first licensed therapy for PMS and enable us to test this approach.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultBiomarkersDisease ProgressionDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsInterferon-betaMaleMiddle AgedMultiple Sclerosis, Chronic ProgressiveRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicYoung AdultBiomarkersImmunosuppressive AgentsInterferon-beta

Identifiers

PMID28429241
OpenAlexW2606980854

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.