ReviewBiomedicines2026
Baclofen for Spasticity in Multiple Sclerosis: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.
Review in Biomedicines, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Baclofen, a GABA-B receptor agonist developed as an anticonvulsant in the 1960s and repurposed for spasticity in the 1970s, is recommended as a first-line oral treatment for spasticity in multiple sclerosis (MS) by UK NICE guidance and is used similarly, though not necessarily designated identically, in many other jurisdictions. It acts at two sites within the spinal stretch reflex arc: presynaptically on Ia afferent terminals in the dorsal horn, where it reduces excitatory neurotransmitter release, and postsynaptically on ventral horn interneurons and α-motoneurons, where it hyperpolarises the cell and suppresses firing. Only a small fraction of an oral dose crosses the blood-CNS barrier, so oral dosing requires high systemic doses that cause sedation, ataxia and CNS depression. Intrathecal delivery bypasses the barrier, allowing a much lower dose and fewer brain-mediated side effects. Other drawbacks include a short, variable half-life, GABA-B receptor downregulation contributing to adverse effects and intrathecal tolerance, and withdrawal that has proved fatal. The narrow efficacy-to-side-effect margin is probably intrinsic to GABA-B receptor activation. This narrative review covers baclofen's neuroanatomy, pharmacokinetics, administration routes, efficacy, comparators, long-term outcomes, interactions, special populations, and regulatory history. Long-term follow-up shows durable control without worsening sedation, but the one study using validated quality-of-life measures found no significant improvement despite clear spasticity reduction. Weighing benefit against harm, this review concludes that baclofen offers a net benefit, but conditionally: only for carefully selected, individually titrated, and actively monitored patients. Because this is a narrative rather than systematic review, source selection was not governed by a prespecified protocol, some clinical estimates rely on secondary or aggregate data, and the underlying literature is heterogeneous in design and quality.
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.