Cited by 166Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesPolyomavirus and related diseasesPeripheral Neuropathies and Disorders

The natural history of multiple sclerosis

Open access
Confavreux, Christian, Compston, Alastair·2006·McAlpine's Multiple Sclerosis

Abstract

The course of multiple sclerosis (MS) results from the interplay of two clinical processes, relapses and progression. Three main clinical forms may be identified as relapsing-remitting, secondary progressive and primary progressive. The disease appears on average at the age of 30 and follows a remitting or a progressive course in 85% and 15% of the cases, respectively. Initial symptoms are related to an isolated or combined disturbance(s) of the long tracts of the central nervous system, of the brainstem, or of the optic nerve in 70%, 20% and 25% of the cases, respectively. The relapse rate is one relapse on average every other year. After an exacerbating-remitting onset of MS, secondary progression appears after 19 years on average. The median time to reach the landmarks of irreversible disability are 8 years regarding limitation of ambulation, 20 years for walking with a stick, and 30 years for wheel-chair dependency. In fact, MS prognosis is highly variable depending on individuals. All the intermediate types do exist between malignant forms, possibly lethal, and benign forms (circa 30% of the cases) that allow normal daily life. The clinical and paraclinical predictive factors identified so far have been acknowledged statistically. They provide little help however, if any, when an individual is concerned. Recent research has showed that relapses have only a marginal effect, relatively to progression, on the accumulation of irreversible neurological disability. Furthermore, the age when reaching the landmarks of irreversible disability is essentially similar whatever the mode of onset of MS, be it exacerbating-remitting or progressive. In spite of the outstanding clinical polymorphism of MS, a unifying concept of the disease ("complexity vs heterogeneity") can be put forward.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/b978-0-443-07271-0.50006-9

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The largest single risk factor for MS is biological sex, with >75% of patients being female.

    “The largest single risk factor for MS is biological sex, with > 75% of patients being female – but the causes for this discrepancy in incidence are unknown.73”

    From Genome‐wide association studies of multiple sclerosis (2018) · cites this paper as [73]

    The section “The sex ratio in multiple sclerosis” (page unavailable) confirms female predominance, but reports a usual ratio of two females to one male and says the highest reported female proportion is 71%. That directly contradicts the claim that more than 75% of patients are female; the passage also does not rank sex as the largest single risk factor. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The causes for the female predominance in MS incidence are unknown.

    “The largest single risk factor for MS is biological sex, with > 75% of patients being female – but the causes for this discrepancy in incidence are unknown.73”

    From Genome‐wide association studies of multiple sclerosis (2018) · cites this paper as [73]

    The section ‘The sex ratio in multiple sclerosis’ (page unavailable) confirms female predominance, but reports a usual ratio of two females to one male and a highest reported female proportion of 71%, not >75%. It does not say that the causes of the predominance are unknown. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • MS is a remarkably heterogeneous disease, with some patients declining rapidly and others showing few or no symptoms for decades.

    “MS is also a remarkably heterogeneous disease, with some patients declining rapidly and others showing few or no symptoms for decades.73”

    From Genome‐wide association studies of multiple sclerosis (2018) · cites this paper as [73]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Confavreux, C., & Compston, A.
Affiliations
Inserm (FR)
Venue
McAlpine's Multiple Sclerosis
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
2006
Volume
56
Issue
12
Pages
183-272
OpenAlex
W111819890
Cited by
166
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
FWCI
62.74
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Elsevier eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Polyomavirus and related diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Peripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, clinical course, relapse, disease progression, relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, secondary progressive multiple sclerosis, primary progressive multiple sclerosis, disability progression, prognosis, predictive factors, disease heterogeneity
MeSH terms
Humans, Multiple Sclerosis, Prognosis, Disease Progression

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