ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Predictive value of individual serum neurofilament light chain levels in short-term disease activity in relapsing multiple sclerosis.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bayes at the Bedside: Biomarkers in Situations of Clinical Uncertainty.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Correlations of cerebrospinal fluid neurofilament light chain levels with clinical and electromyography findings in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Serum Neurofilament Light Chain in Multiple Sclerosis: Superiority of Age- and BMI-Corrected Z Scores/Percentiles Over Absolute Cutoff Values for Prediction of Treatment Response.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2025Observational
- Review
- Correlation of Neurodegenerative Biomarkers and Functional Outcome in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis.Neurology international · 2025Article
- Steps toward the implementation of neurofilaments in multiple sclerosis: patient profiles to be prioritized in clinical practice.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Establishing Normal Serum Values of Neurofilament Light Chains and Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein Considering the Effects of Age and Other Demographic Factors in Healthy Adults.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Real-World Study of Serum Neurofilament Light Chain Levels in Ocrelizumab-Treated People with Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Serum neurofilament light chain in multiple sclerosis: from biological signal to clinically informed decision-making.Frontiers in neurologyReview
- Relapse or no relapse in multiple sclerosis: Can disease activity biomarkers support the clinician?Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinicalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The assessment of serum neurofilament light chain (sNFL) has emerged as a diagnostic and prognostic tool in monitoring multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the application of periodic measurement in daily practice remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate the predictive value of individual sNFL levels in determining disease activity in patients with relapsing MS (RMS). Methods: In this two-year prospective study, 129 RMS patients underwent quarterly sNFL assessments and annual MRI scans. The study analyzed the correlation between individual NFL levels and past, current, and future disease activity. Group-level Z-scores were employed as a comparative measure. Results: Among the 37 participants, a total of 61 episodes of disease activity were observed. sNFL levels proved valuable in distinct ways; they were confirmatory of previous and current clinical and/or radiological activity and demonstrated a high negative predictive value for future 90 days activity. Interestingly, Z-scores marginally outperformed sNFL levels in terms of predictive accuracy, indicating the potential for alternative approaches in disease activity assessment. In our cohort, sNFL cut-offs of 10.8 pg./mL (sensitivity 27%, specificity 90%) and 14.3 pg./mL (sensitivity 15%, specificity 95%) correctly identified 7 and 4 out of 26 cases of radiological activity within 90 days, respectively, with 14 and 15% false negatives. When using lower cut-off values, individuals with sNFL levels below 5 pg/mL (with a sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 25%, and negative predictive value of 94%) were less likely to experience radiological activity within the next 3 months. Conclusion: Individual sNFL levels may potentially confirm prior or current disease activity and predict short-term future radiological activity in RMS. These findings underscore its periodic measurement as a valuable tool in RMS management and decision-making, enhancing the precision of clinical evaluation in routine practice.
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.