ArticleAnnals of clinical and translational neurology2025
Real World Effectiveness and Tolerability of Novel Monoclonal Antibodies and Rituximab for NMOSD.
Article in Annals of clinical and translational neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inebilizumab in AQP4-Seropositive NMOSD: One-Year Follow-Up From a Multicenter, Real-World Study.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Article
- Severe attacks and worse prognosis in patients with late-onset neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder highlight the need for early highly effective treatment.Journal of neurology · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this multicenter retrospective cohort study of 135 people with aquaporin-4 IgG+ neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD), some of whom were exposed to multiple therapies, we evaluated the effectiveness and tolerability of rituximab (n = 111) and novel monoclonal antibodies (nMAbs): eculizumab (n = 9), inebilizumab (n = 23), and satralizumab (n = 14). Over a median follow-up of 3.92 years, 21/111 rituximab-treated patients relapsed. In contrast, relapse occurred in only 1/23 inebilizumab-treated patients (median follow-up 1.27 years), with no relapses observed in those receiving eculizumab or satralizumab. Twelve-month relapse-free probabilities were 92% (rituximab), 94% (inebilizumab), and 100% (eculizumab and satralizumab). Among those with available MRI data, 10/73 rituximab and 1/14 inebilizumab developed new lesions. There were no serious adverse events. These findings support nMAbs as effective and well-tolerated first-line therapies for NMOSD.
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.