Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42343999›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology

Menopause and ageing in women with multiple sclerosis.

Cecilia Smith Simonsen, Elisabeth Gulowsen Celius

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Cecilia Smith SimonsenDepartment of Neurology, Vestre Viken Hospital Trust, Drammen, Norway.
Elisabeth Gulowsen CeliusDepartment of Neurology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The multiple sclerosis (MS) population is ageing, and a substantial proportion of women with MS are now peri- or postmenopausal. Whether menopause independently influences disease activity and progression remains unclear, and findings across studies are inconsistent. The objective of this study was to explore how menopause and biological ageing interact in MS, with a focus on inflammatory activity, disability progression, symptom burden, and clinical management. Methods: This narrative review is based on a structured literature search of PubMed, supplemented by reference screening. Results: Current evidence does not support menopause as a clear inflection point for relapse activity or MRI-defined inflammation. Similarly, recent larger studies do not demonstrate a distinct effect of menopause on Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) progression after accounting for age. Emerging data suggest that reproductive ageing may be associated with increased neuroaxonal vulnerability, although findings remain limited and require replication. Symptom burden frequently worsens in midlife, reflecting overlapping effects of hormonal changes, comorbidities, and ageing, which complicates clinical interpretation and management. Evidence for menopausal hormone therapy in MS is limited; it appears to improve symptoms, but its impact on disease course remains uncertain. Conclusion: There is no convincing evidence that menopause represents an independent biological inflection point in MS. Rather, it is better understood as part of broader biological ageing, interacting with symptom burden, comorbidity, and reduced physiological reserve. A menopause-aware approach to MS care is needed to avoid misattribution and optimise management in an ageing, predominantly female population.

Indexed as

ageingmenopausal hormone therapymenopauseMSmultiple sclerosisreproductive ageing

Identifiers

PMID42343999
PMCPMC13286807

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.