ArticleJournal of neurology2025
Personalized therapy in multiple sclerosis: an Italian Delphi consensus.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- French expert opinion on the long-term management of relapsing multiple sclerosis with cladribine tablets beyond year 4.Journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Subcutaneous Ocrelizumab for the Treatment of Relapsing Forms of Multiple Sclerosis: A Budget Impact Model.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Personalized medicine as a novel therapeutic approach for autoimmune diseases: new insights and future prospects.Osong public health and research perspectives · 2026Article
- Is therapy-free remission a realistic goal with cladribine tablets in multiple sclerosis? New insights into the mechanism of action and clinical implications of immune reconstitution with cladribine tablets in MS therapy.Journal of neurology · 2025Review
- UK Medical Cannabis Registry: An Updated Analysis of Cannabis-Based Medicinal Products for Multiple Sclerosis.Medical cannabis and cannabinoidsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe increasing availability of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) may provide more personalized treatment options for multiple sclerosis (MS) based on various factors, including patients' characteristics, prognostic indicators, comorbidities, and safety. In Italy, recent efforts focused on promoting interdisciplinary, patient-centered care and equitable access to optimized therapies, as reported in the 2023 Barometer of Multiple Sclerosis and Related Diseases from the Italian Multiple Sclerosis Association. A key challenge is ensuring equitable access to homogeneous and personalized therapeutic strategies. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing a Delphi methodology, a panel of Italian neurologists with expertise in MS evaluated consensus on specific aspects of MS treatments, including personalized therapy, patient involvement in decision-making, treatment flexibility, self-management of therapies, perception of treatment efficacy and safety and therapeutic sequence management.
resultsOf 166 votes, 116 statements reached consensus (68% positive, 2% negative), representing 70% of the total, whereas 50 (30%) highlighted areas of non-consensus. The findings emphasize the central role of neurologists, the importance of personalized therapy, the inclusion of patients in therapeutic choices to enhance adherence and quality of life, and managing both quality of life and caregiver burden. Most high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (HE DMTs), like cladribine and anti-CD20 therapies, recognized for their efficacy and convenience of administration, received positive consensus, emphasizing their perceived value in individualized treatment approaches.
conclusionsThis research highlights best practices and provides a roadmap for improving patient outcomes through tailored, well-communicated therapeutic strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.