SynthesisBMC neurology2025
Comparative effectiveness of disease-modifying therapies for highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis despite previous treatment - a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Relapse prediction and individualized treatment-effect modeling in relapsing multiple sclerosis: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Subcutaneous Ocrelizumab for the Treatment of Relapsing Forms of Multiple Sclerosis: A Budget Impact Model.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- High-Intensity Interval Training Snacks Improve Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Neuroinflammation and Mental Health in Multiple Sclerosis and Autoimmune Encephalitis: Bridging Biological Mechanisms and Psychosocial Factors.Archives of internal medicine research · 2026Article
- Modulating glutamate neurotransmission inFrontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Natalizumab for pediatric multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComparative assessments of all available disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) in patients with highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) are lacking, even though some of these DMTs are restricted to this MS subpopulation. We therefore aimed to compare DMTs in patients with highly active RRMS using re-analyses of individual patient data (IPD) provided by study sponsors.
methodsWe searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included adult patients with RRMS and directly compared alemtuzumab, cladribine, dimethyl fumarate, fingolimod, natalizumab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, ozanimod, ponesimod and teriflunomide, or compared these DMTs with other drugs or placebo. Re-analyses of IPD for subpopulations of patients with high disease activity despite previous DMT were included in network meta-analyses (NMAs). As there is no widely accepted definition of high disease activity in RRMS, criteria were chosen to cover as wide a range of definitions as possible, while being sufficiently similar across studies.
resultsWe identified 14 relevant RCTs, including only 3 head-to-head comparisons of DMTs, and no relevant studies on natalizumab. All studies were pivotal studies for approval. The available re-analyses of IPD did not allow comprehensive NMAs. The main reasons for this were the overall paucity of RCTs, especially head-to-head comparisons, and a high risk of bias. In addition, data on patient-relevant outcomes and long-term follow-up (> 2 years) were lacking.
conclusionBased on the largest possible evidence base, including previously unpublished data, our systematic review shows substantial evidence gaps for DMTs in highly active RRMS. This indicates a need for further research beyond regulatory requirements.
trial registrationClinical trial number: not applicable.
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.