ArticleNeurology and therapy2025
Long-Term Management and Therapeutic Sequencing for Patients with Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis in France: A Vignette Study.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- DELPHI expert consensus-derived factors influencing the early use of monoclonal high-efficacy therapies in treatment-naïve patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- International Expert Opinion on Optimal Switching to Cladribine Tablets from Other High-Efficacy Disease-Modifying Therapies for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: Opportunities and Challenges.Neurology and therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe have analysed prescribing decisions for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) of 111 neurologists ("participating physicians") in France using hypothetical case vignettes.
methodsSix case vignettes were presented to participating physicians, each based on realistic, hypothetical clinical interactions between a neurologist and people with active or highly active RMS, with or without prior treatment with a disease-modifying therapy (DMT). "Disruptive events" are where the appearance of new MS disease activity, side-effects or other issues prompted the return of the hypothetical patients for a review of their care.
resultsA population of 111 participating physicians reviewed the cases and recommended treatments. Our data suggested a willingness among participating physicians to treat with higher-efficacy DMTs early in the course of RMS, with platform agents given to only one-quarter of DMT-naïve cases. MS disease activity was the main driver of switches to higher-efficacy DMTs, although an escalation approach was common in response to either moderate MS disease activity or side-effects on platform agents. A desire for pregnancy drove high usage of cladribine tablets and natalizumab (especially for cases negative for John Cunningham virus).
conclusionsThese findings suggest that the management of RMS in France has shifted in recent years towards a desire to achieve earlier and more effective control of disease activity for people with RMS. Better guidance on the sequencing of DMTs for different scenarios within the overall management of RMS may be warranted. This study offers valuable insights into the current practices of French neurologists in managing RMS, emphasizing the complexity of therapeutic decisions, the diversity of strategies, and the significance of an individualized approach in treatment management.
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.