Trial reportCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2022
Results from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of repository corticotropin injection for multiple sclerosis relapse that did not adequately respond to corticosteroids.
Trial report in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Results from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of repository corticotropin injection for multiple sclerosis relapse that did not adequately respond to corticosteroids.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2022Trial
- A Narrative Review of the Immunomodulatory Effects of ActharAdvances in therapy · 2025Review
- ActharClinical drug investigation · 2023Review
- A Narrative Review of Acthar Gel for the Treatment of Myositis.Rheumatology and therapy · 2023Review
- Acthar Gel Inhibits the Activation of CD4Journal of interferon & cytokine research : the official journal of the International Society for Interferon and Cytokine Research · 2023Article
- Acthar Gel (RCI): A Narrative Literature Review of Clinical and Economic Evidence.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAbout 20%-35% of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients fail to respond to high-dose corticosteroids during a relapse. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI, Acthar
aimsThe study objective was to determine the efficacy and safety of RCI in patients with MS relapse that inadequately responded to corticosteroids. This was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Nonresponders to high-dose corticosteroids were randomized to receive RCI (80 U) or placebo daily for 14 days. Assessments included improvements on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29), Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I), and adverse events (AEs).
resultsEighteen patients received RCI, and 17 received placebo. A greater proportion of EDSS responders was observed in the RCI group at Day 7, 21, and 42 compared with the placebo group. Qualitative CGI-I showed that more patients receiving RCI were much improved or very much improved than with placebo. No meaningful differences were observed between treatment groups for MSIS-29. No serious AEs or deaths were reported.
conclusionRCI is safe and effective for MS relapse patients who do not respond to high-dose corticosteroids.
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.