ReviewJournal of neurology2026
French expert opinion on the long-term management of relapsing multiple sclerosis with cladribine tablets beyond year 4.
Review in Journal of neurology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cladribine tablets (CladT) is a high-efficacy treatment (HET) for the management of relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS) that acts as an immune reconstitution therapy (IRT). Administered as two short annual courses, CladT has been shown to provide durable disease control in responders for up to 11 years, extending well beyond the short treatment periods. Randomised trials do not offer evidence-based guidance on the therapeutic use of CladT beyond four years post-initiation, leading to variability in long-term management strategies in real-world practice, notably with respect to the possibility of additional treatment. We propose a pragmatic algorithm for long-term treatment with CladT, grounded in currently available data and our French collective clinical experience, intended to assist neurologists in therapeutic decision-making in year 5 and beyond. We suggest a practical classification of patients into two main profiles after the initial 4-year period: those who remain clinically and radiologically stable, and those who exhibit evidence of disease reactivation. A stable profile, which encompasses a large proportion of treated patients, may be managed through continued monitoring or additional treatment, depending on individual presentations and the presence or absence of factors associated with higher likelihood of RMS reactivation before CladT initiation. For patients demonstrating signs of disease activity, options include additional treatment with CladT or transitioning to another HET, according to the severity of inflammatory reactivation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42552266What 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.