ArticleBrain : a journal of neurology2026
Neurological disease progression in adults with ataxia-telangiectasia: a longitudinal study.
Article in Brain : a 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ataxia-telangiectasia (AT) is a rare, multisystem neurodegenerative disorder with marked clinical heterogeneity. Longitudinal data on neurological progression remain limited, restricting understanding of disease mechanisms and therapeutic trial design. We analysed longitudinal Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) data from the largest published adult AT cohort to date (n = 82, age > 16 years). Linear mixed-effects models were used to estimate severity at the earliest available neurological evaluation (baseline) and annual progression rates (points/year) in classic and variant AT, and to examine clinical and genetic modifiers. Neurological impairment progressed with a mean SARA increase of 0.38 points/year. Adults with classic AT were more severely affected than those with variant AT, with SARA scores approximately 8-9 points higher at baseline. However, neurological progression in adulthood was similar between classic and variant AT (0.33 versus 0.41 points/year), which includes 15 individuals with the antisense oligonucleotide targetable c.5763-1050A>G variant. Although AT subtypes differ substantially in childhood and adolescence, neurological decline converges to a similar pace in adulthood, irrespective of subtype or genotype. SARA remains a useful outcome measure but may underestimate progression in advanced disease and non-cerebellar domains. These findings inform counselling, prognostication and the design of interventional trials, including mutation-specific therapies.
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.