Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39444698›Full record

ReviewThe Lancet regional health. Europe2024

Fluid biomarkers in multiple sclerosis: from current to future applications.

Massimiliano Di Filippo, Lorenzo Gaetani, Diego Centonze, Harald Hegen, Jens Kuhle, Charlotte E Teunissen, Mar Tintoré, Luisa M Villar, Eline A J Willemse, Henrik Zetterberg and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

64 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Induced pluripotent stem cell treatment for microglia replacement in progressive MS.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Massimiliano Di FilippoSection of Neurology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
Lorenzo GaetaniSection of Neurology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
Diego CentonzeIRCCS Neuromed, Pozzilli, IS, Italy.
Harald HegenDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Jens KuhleDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Charlotte E TeunissenNeurochemistry Laboratory, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Mar TintoréMultiple Sclerosis Centre of Catalonia (Cemcat), Department of Neurology, Hospital Universitari Vall D'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Universitat de Vic-Universitat Central de Catalunya (UVic-UCC), Barcelona, Spain.
Luisa M VillarDepartments of Immunology and Neurology, Multiple Sclerosis Unit, Hospital Ramon y Cajal, (IRYCIS), Madrid, Spain.
Eline A J WillemseDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital and University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Henrik ZetterbergDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience & Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Mölndal, Sweden.
Lucilla ParnettiSection of Neurology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an immune-mediated inflammatory and degenerative disorder of the central nervous system (CNS) with heterogeneous clinical manifestations. In the last decade, the landscape of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood biomarkers as potential key tools for MS diagnosis, prognosis and treatment monitoring has evolved considerably, alongside magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). CSF analysis has the potential not only to provide information on the underlying immunopathology of the disease and exclude differential diagnoses, but also to predict the risk of future relapses and disability accrual, guide therapeutic decisions and thus improve patient outcomes. This Series article overviews the biological framework and current applicability of fluid biomarkers for MS, exploring their potential role in the molecular characterisation of the disease. We discuss recent advances in the field of neurochemistry that enabled the detection of brain-derived proteins in blood, opening the door to much more efficient longitudinal disease monitoring. Furthermore, we identify the current challenges in the application of fluid biomarkers for MS in a real-world setting, while offering recommendations for harnessing their full potential as key paraclinical tools to improve patient management and personalise treatment.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBloodCerebrospinal fluidMultiple sclerosis

Identifiers

PMID39444698
PMCPMC11496979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.