ArticleAnnals of neurology2026
Real-World Effectiveness of Switching to Oral or Infusion Versus Injectable Disease-Modifying Therapy in Pediatric Multiple Sclerosis.
Article in Annals of neurology, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess real-world effectiveness of switching disease-modifying therapy (DMT) in pediatric multiple sclerosis (MS) and clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) initially treated with platform injectables on disease activity.
methodsOf 2615 pediatric-onset demyelinating disease patients at 12 clinics in the United States (US) Network of Pediatric MS Centers, those with MS/CIS on initial therapy with a platform injectable who switched to another class of platform injectable, oral or infusion DMT were analyzed. Relapse rate was modeled with negative binomial regression, adjusted for preidentified confounders.
resultsA total of 212 children switched DMT before age 18 (67% female, 95% MS). Ninety-three switched from injectable to injectable, 76 injectable to oral, and 43 injectable to infusion. Switchers to oral or infusion were older at onset (injectable 12.3 years, oral 13.5 years, and infusion 14.2 years) and switch (injectable 14.6 years, oral 16.0 years, and infusion 15.7 years). Switchers to infusion DMT were more likely to have enhancing lesions (injectable 45%, oral 28%, and infusion 67%). Compared to injectable (annualized relapse rate [ARR] = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.52-1.48), relapse rates were lower for injectable to oral (ARR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.20-0.57; rate ratio: 0.38, 95% CI = 0.21-0.69) and injectable to infusion (ARR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.09-0.37; rate ratio: 0.21, 95% CI = 0.10-0.44) (p < 0.001). Adjusted number needed to treat in person-years to prevent 1 relapse with oral over injectable was 1.84 (95% CI = 1.03-8.69) and infusion over injectable 1.43 (95% CI = 1.00-3.88).
interpretationSwitching from platform injectable to oral or infusion compared to other platform injectable DMT led to better disease control in pediatric MS. Long-term safety data are required. ANN NEUROL 2026;99:715-729.
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.