The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Long‐term evolution of multiple sclerosis disability in the treatment era
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To characterize the accrual of long‐term disability in a cohort of actively treated multiple sclerosis (MS) patients and to assess whether clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data used in clinical trials have long‐term prognostic value. Methods: This is a prospective study of 517 actively managed MS patients enrolled at a single center. Results: More than 91% of patients were retained, with data ascertained up to 10 years after the baseline visit. At this last assessment, neurologic disability as measured by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) was stable or improved compared to baseline in 41% of patients. Subjects with no evidence of disease activity (NEDA) by clinical and MRI criteria during the first 2 years had long‐term outcomes that were no different from those of the cohort as a whole. 25‐OH vitamin D serum levels were inversely associated with short‐term MS disease activity; however, these levels had no association with long‐term disability. At a median time of 16.8 years after disease onset, 10.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 7.2–14%) of patients reached an EDSS ≥ 6, and 18.1% (95% CI = 13.5–22.5%) evolved from relapsing MS to secondary progressive MS (SPMS). Interpretation: Rates of worsening and evolution to SPMS were substantially lower when compared to earlier natural history studies. Notably, the NEDA 2‐year endpoint was not a predictor of long‐term stability. Finally, the data call into question the utility of annual MRI assessments as a treat‐to‐target approach for MS care. Ann Neurol 2016;80:499–510
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: An expanded disability status scale (EDSS)
Kurtzke, J. F. (1983) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.33.11.1444 · Cited by 15,011
Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 revisions to the McDonald criteria
Polman, C. H., Reingold, S. C., Banwell, B., Clanet, M., Cohen, J. A., Filippi, M., Fujihara, K., Havrdova, E., Hutchinson, M., Kappos, L., et al. (2011) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.22366 · Cited by 9,802
Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: The 2013 revisions
Lublin, F. D., Reingold, S. C., Cohen, J. A., Cutter, G. R., Sørensen, P. S., Thompson, A. J., Wolinsky, J. S., Balcer, L. J., Banwell, B., Barkhof, F., et al. (2014) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000000560 · Cited by 3,177
Self-citationGenetic risk and a primary role for cell-mediated immune mechanisms in multiple sclerosis
The International Multiple Sclerosis Genetics Consortium & The Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium 2 (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10251 · Cited by 2,697
Progressive multiple sclerosis: pathology and pathogenesis
Lassmann, H., van Horssen, J., & Mahad, D. (2012) · Nature Reviews Neurology · doi:10.1038/nrneurol.2012.168 · Cited by 1,033
Cited by
Reich, D. S., Lucchinetti, C. F., & Calabresi, P. A. (2018) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra1401483 · Cited by 2,491
Ocrelizumab versus Interferon Beta-1a in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis
Hauser, S. L., Bar-Or, A., Comi, G., Giovannoni, G., Hartung, H.-P., Hemmer, B., Lublin, F., Montalban, X., Rammohan, K. W., Selmaj, K., et al. (2017) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1601277 · Cited by 2,021
Self-citationDiagnosis and Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis: A Review
McGinley, M. P., Goldschmidt, C. H., & Rae-Grant, A. D. (2021) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2020.26858 · Cited by 1,205
Multiple sclerosis animal models: a clinical and histopathological perspective
Kipp, M., Nyamoya, S., Hochstrasser, T., & Amor, S. (2017) · Brain Pathology · doi:10.1111/bpa.12454 · Cited by 226
Cantó, E., Barro, C., Zhao, C., Caillier, S. J., Michalak, Z., Bove, R., Tomic, D., Santaniello, A., Häring, D. A., Hollenbach, J., et al. (2019) · JAMA Neurology · doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.2137 · Cited by 199
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- University of California, S. F. M. T., Cree, B. A. C., Gourraud, P., Oksenberg, J. R., Bevan, C., Crabtree‐Hartman, E., Gelfand, J. M., Goodin, D. S., Graves, J., Green, A. J., Mowry, E., Okuda, D. T., Pelletier, D., von Büdingen, H. ‐., Zamvil, S. S., Agrawal, A., Caillier, S., Ciocca, C., Gomez, R., Kanner, R., Lincoln, R., Lizee, A., Qualley, P., Santaniello, A., Suleiman, L., Bucci, M., Panara, V., Papinutto, N., Stern, W. A., Zhu, A. H., Cutter, G. R., Baranzini, S., Henry, R. G., & Hauser, S. L.
- Venue
- Annals of Neurology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-08-13
- Volume
- 80
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 499-510
- ISSN
- 0364-5134 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-8249
- OpenAlex
- W2489432788
- Cited by
- 440
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 35.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Long‐term evolution of multiple sclerosis disability in the treatment era. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ana.24747
- The paper
- University of California, S. F. M. T., Cree, B. A. C., Gourraud, P., Oksenberg, J. R., Bevan, C., Crabtree‐Hartman, E., Gelfand, J. M., Goodin, D. S., Graves, J., Green, A. J., Mowry, E., Okuda, D. T., Pelletier, D., von Büdingen, H. ‐., Zamvil, S. S., Agrawal, A., Caillier, S., Ciocca, C., Gomez, R., . . . Hauser, S. L. (2016). Long‐term evolution of multiple sclerosis disability in the treatment era. Annals of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24747
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.