Evidence mapPaperPMID 42396441Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2026

Multiple sclerosis and the limits of classical autoimmune theory.

Anna Karin Hedström, Fredrik Piehl

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. 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.

Anna Karin HedströmDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Fredrik PiehlDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Concepts of autoimmune disease have traditionally emphasized genetic susceptibility, antigen-specific immune activation, and inflammation as linear drivers of tissue injury and clinical symptoms. While this framework has been highly successful in explaining disease initiation and guiding the development of immunomodulatory therapies, accumulating evidence indicates important limitations in its capacity to account for long-term disease outcomes. In this review, we use multiple sclerosis (MS) as an illustrative case through which autoimmune theory can be critically examined. MS provides strong support for immune-mediated mechanisms in early disease, yet it also shows that neurodegeneration and disability accumulation often become uncoupled from overt inflammatory activity. These observations challenge linear models and sustained coupling between immune activity, tissue injury, and clinical progression. We use this gap between theoretical expectations and observed disease patterns to examine broader conceptual issues relevant to autoimmune and immune-mediated diseases, particularly the need to distinguish between mechanisms of susceptibility, inflammatory activity, and progressive worsening, and to incorporate temporal dynamics, interactions, and tissue-specific responses into explanatory models. We argue that the main contribution of MS lies not in serving as a generalizable model, but in clarifying the scope and limits of autoimmune theory and in underscoring the importance of theoretical refinement for organizing increasingly complex empirical evidence.

Indexed as

AutoimmunityMultiple SclerosisAnimalsAutoimmune DiseasesDisease ProgressionDisease SusceptibilityHumansautoimmunitybiomarkerscausal inferencedisease mechanismsdisease progressioninflammationmultiple sclerosisneurodegeneration

Identifiers

PMID42396441
PMCPMC13322941

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.