ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Comparative Analysis of Neurodegeneration and Axonal Dysfunction Biomarkers in the Cerebrospinal Fluid of Patients with Multiple Sclerosis.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Azetidine-2-carboxylic acid-induced oligodendrogliopathy in vitro and the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis.Journal of neuropathology and experimental neurology · 2026Article
- Profiling the Cerebrospinal Fluid Proteome in Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: Treatment Effects and Associations with IgM Oligoclonal Bands.Journal of neuroimmune pharmacology : the official journal of the Society on NeuroImmune Pharmacology · 2025Article
- Cerebrospinal fluid neurofilament light chain in acute optic neuritis and its predictive ability of multiple sclerosis.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- The Relationships between Cerebrospinal Fluid Glial (CXCL12, CX3CL, YKL-40) and Synaptic Biomarkers (Ng, NPTXR) in Early Alzheimer's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Disease Activity and Progression in Multiple Sclerosis: New Evidences and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven the significant role of neurodegeneration in the progression of multiple sclerosis (MS) and insufficient therapies, there is an urgent need to better understand this pathology and to find new biomarkers that could provide important insight into the biological mechanisms of the disease. Thus, the present study aimed to compare different neurodegeneration and axonal dysfunction biomarkers in MS and verify their potential clinical usefulness.
methodsA total of 59 patients, who underwent CSF analysis during their diagnostics, were enrolled in the study. Quantitative analysis of neurodegeneration biomarkers was performed through immunological tests. Oligoclonal bands were detected by isoelectric focusing on agarose gel, whereas the concentrations of immunoglobulins and albumin were measured using nephelometry.
resultsOur studies showed that NfL, RTN4, and tau protein enabled the differentiation of MS patients from the control group. Additionally, the baseline CSF NfL levels positively correlated with the tau and MRI results, whereas the RTN4 concentrations were associated with the immunoglobulin quotients. The AUC for NfL was the highest among the tested proteins, although the DeLong test of the ROC curves showed no significant difference between the AUCs for NfL and RTN4.
conclusionThe CSF NfL, RTN-4, and tau levels at the time of diagnosis could be potential diagnostic markers of multiple sclerosis, although NfL seems to have the best clinical value.
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.