ReviewBiomedicines2022
The Brave New World of Early Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis: Using the Molecular Biomarkers CXCL13 and Neurofilament Light to Optimize Immunotherapy.
Review in Biomedicines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tertiary lymphoid structures in neuroinflammation coordinate neuroimmune homeostasis and pathological progression.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2026Review
- Impact of Anti-CD20 Therapies on Cytokine, Chemokine and Adhesion Molecule Dynamics in Multiple Sclerosis: A Narrative Review.Neurology and therapy · 2026Review
- Emerging CSF and Serum Biomarkers in Multiple Sclerosis: Cytokines, MOG, GFAP, and Beyond.Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation · 2026Article
- A Long-Term Prospective Evaluation of the Predictive Value of Molecular Markers in Serum and Cerebrospinal Fluid in Patients in the Early Stage of Multiple Sclerosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Advanced immunotherapy across diseases and the role of artificial intelligence: A review.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2026Review
- Comprehensive analysis of B cell repopulation in ocrelizumab-treated patients with multiple sclerosis by mass cytometry and proteomics.iScience · 2025Article
- CSF biomarkers of B-cell activation in multiple sclerosis: a clinical perspective.Journal of neurology · 2025Review
- No Relation Between Cognitive Impairment, Physical Disability and Serum Biomarkers in a Cohort of Progressive Multiple Sclerosis Patients.Biomolecules · 2025Article
- Proteomics reveal biomarkers for diagnosis, disease activity and long-term disability outcomes in multiple sclerosis.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Cellular and Molecular Evidence of Multiple Sclerosis Diagnosis and Treatment Challenges.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Neurodegeneration and its potential markers in the diagnosing of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. A review.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2023Review
- Decision trees to evaluate the risk of developing multiple sclerosis.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a highly heterogeneous disease involving a combination of inflammation, demyelination, and CNS injury. It is the leading cause of non-traumatic neurological disability in younger people. There is no cure, but treatments in the form of immunomodulatory drugs (IMDs) are available. Experience over the last 30 years has shown that IMDs, also sometimes called disease-modifying therapies, are effective in downregulating neuroinflammatory activity. However, there are a number of negatives in IMD therapy, including potential for significant side-effects and adverse events, uncertainty about long-term benefits regarding disability outcomes, and very high and increasing financial costs. The two dozen currently available FDA-approved IMDs also are heterogeneous with respect to efficacy and safety, especially long-term safety, and determining an IMD treatment strategy is therefore challenging for the clinician. Decisions about optimal therapy have been particularly difficult in early MS, at the time of the initial clinical demyelinating event (ICDE), at a time when early, aggressive treatment would best be initiated on patients destined to have a highly inflammatory course. However, given the fact that the majority of ICDE patients have a more benign course, aggressive immunosuppression, with its attendant risks, should not be administered to this group, and should only be reserved for patients with a more neuroinflammatory course, a decision that can only be made in retrospect, months to years after the ICDE. This quandary of moderate vs. aggressive therapy facing clinicians would best be resolved by the use of biomarkers that are predictive of future neuroinflammation. Unfortunately, biomarkers, especially molecular biomarkers, have not thus far been particularly useful in assisting clinicians in predicting the likelihood of future neuroinflammation, and thus guiding therapy. However, the last decade has seen the emergence of two highly promising molecular biomarkers to guide therapy in early MS: the CXCL13 index and neurofilament light. This paper will review the immunological and neuroscientific underpinnings of these biomarkers and the data supporting their use in early MS and will propose how they will likely be used to maximize benefit and minimize risk of IMDs in MS patients.
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.