Observational studyJournal of neurology2024
Disease-modifying treatment, long-term outcomes and transition to progressive multiple sclerosis: data based on the New York State MS Consortium.
Observational study in Journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Designing studies for post-treatment Lyme disease and other infection-associated chronic illnesses.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Predicting disease progression in multiple sclerosis with clinically accessible information and technology.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Advanced multiple sclerosis: an exploratory study on a neglected patient population.Journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Post-Partum Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcome Changes in Mothers with Multiple Sclerosis: Findings from the NAPPREMS Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe impact of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) on multiple sclerosis (MS) long-term outcomes is continuously evolving. Retrospective analyses of large and long-term registries could provide information regarding general disease trajectories and risk factors that are commonly not investigated in shorter clinical trial settings.
methodsRetrospective observational study of people with MS (pwMS) registered in New York State MS Consortium (NYSMSC) since 1996. Disability outcomes of reaching sustained Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores of 4.0, 6.0 and transition to secondary-progressive MS (SPMS) were confirmed at follow-up. Four DMT categories were determined (1) continuous DMT use, (2) discontinued DMT, (3) (re)started DMT and (4) never treated with DMT. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) were acquired using LIFEware system. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and adjusted analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) were used to determine the rate and factors related to disability progression.
resultsTotal of 1893 pwMS were included with baseline average age of 43.2 years (SD = 10.4), 9.6 years of disease duration (SD = 8.8), median EDSS of 3.0 (IQR 2.0-3.5) and average follow-up time of 6.9 years (SD = 4.9). In addition to being male, older, more disabled and reporting worse PROs at baseline, pwMS who discontinued DMT had more than 5.5 times greater risk of reaching sustained EDSS of 4.0 (OR = 5.56, 95% CI 2.78-11.0, p < 0.001). Similarly, pwMS who discontinued DMT during the NYSMSC follow-up had 3.8- and 4.7-times greater risk to reach sustained EDSS 6.0 (OR = 3.86, 95% CI 2.12-7.02, p < 0.001), and to transition to SPMS (OR = 4.77, 95% CI 2.9-7.87, p < 0.001). Propensity matching analysis confirmed the worse clinical outcomes.
conclusionsIn addition to known predictors of long-term clinical outcomes, pwMS who discontinue DMT have worse long-term disability trajectory when compared to both early and late DMT starters. PRO-based indicators may suggest worse clinical outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37995009What 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.