SynthesisMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Systematic Review of Monoclonal Antibody Therapies in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis: Comparator-Stratified Analysis of Relapse and Disability Outcomes.
Synthesis in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Background: monoclonal antibody therapies represent high-efficacy treatment options for relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the absence of direct head-to-head randomized trials and the use of heterogeneous comparators across pivotal studies complicate comparative effectiveness assessments. While network meta-analysis (NMA) offers a framework to integrate evidence, the fragmented structure of the available evidence base precludes a conventional NMA with global indirect comparisons and treatment ranking.
methodsA systematic review with qualitative assessment of treatment effects of randomized controlled trials evaluating monoclonal antibody therapies in relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis was conducted. Annualized relapse rate (ARR) was analyzed as the primary outcome, and six-month confirmed disability progression (CDP) as the key secondary outcome. Network geometry and connectivity were explicitly assessed for each outcome prior to quantitative synthesis. Analyses were restricted to comparator-defined connected components of the evidence base, and indirect comparisons across disconnected components were not performed. Sensitivity analyses, including descriptive analyses in progressive multiple sclerosis, were conducted where appropriate.
resultsnine randomized controlled trials involving 6762 patients were included. For ARR, the evidence network was fragmented into three disconnected components defined by placebo-, interferon beta-1a-, and teriflunomide-controlled trials. Within connected sub-networks, monoclonal antibody therapies consistently demonstrated substantial reductions in ARR relative to their respective comparators, with overlapping confidence intervals suggesting broadly comparable relapse suppression among high-efficacy agents. For CDP, network connectivity was more limited, and treatment effects were more heterogeneous. Significant reductions in disability progression were observed for some agents within comparator-specific networks, while uncertainty remained for others. Due to network disconnection, no global treatment ranking was performed.
conclusionsthis study provides a transparent synthesis of randomized evidence on monoclonal antibody therapies in relapsing MS. By explicitly accounting for network connectivity and comparator heterogeneity, the analysis avoids unsupported indirect comparisons and global treatment hierarchies. The findings support robust relapse suppression across monoclonal antibody therapies within comparable trial frameworks, while highlighting heterogeneity in disability outcomes. These results illustrate the importance of contextual interpretation in comparative effectiveness research in MS.
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.