↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness and baseline factors associated to fingolimod response in a real-world study on multiple sclerosis patients

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Effectiveness and baseline factors associated to fingolimod response in a real-world study on multiple sclerosis patients
Published in
Journal of Neurology, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00415-018-8791-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

F. Esposito, L. Ferrè, F. Clarelli, M. A. Rocca, G. Sferruzza, L. Storelli, M. Radaelli, F. Sangalli, L. Moiola, B. Colombo, F. Martinelli Boneschi, G. Comi, M. Filippi, V. Martinelli

Abstract

Treatment choice in multiple sclerosis (MS) is crucial for optimizing risk-benefit profile. To assess fingolimod (FTY) effectiveness and identify baseline features associated to disease activity in a large Italian cohort of Relapsing-Remitting (RR) MS patients. Three-hundred sixty-seven RRMS patients starting FTY treatment at San Raffaele Hospital (Milan-Italy) underwent clinical and MRI evaluations for 2 years. Treatment response was assessed considering the proportion of patients with no evidence of disease activity (NEDA) and recording the time to first relapse. Primary analyses were performed stratifying for Natalizumab (NTZ) treatment in the year before (NO_NTZ vs NTZ group), to account for post-NTZ reactivation. Almost half of patients were NEDA after 2 years, 53.4% in the NO_NTZ group and 36.2% in the NTZ group. Despite an opposite trend during the first 6-12 months, at 2-year follow-up the two groups were comparable for relapses and number of new/enlarging T2 and Gd-enhancing lesions. Baseline parameters of higher disease activity (ARR, Gd enhancing lesions and age at onset) were associated with increased likelihood of failing NEDA criteria or with shorter time to relapse (p < 0.05). Our data strengthen FTY effectiveness in everyday clinical practice, even in patients switching from NTZ treatment. Baseline parameters of inflammatory activity are the most important prognostic factors for mid-term disease reactivation also during second-line treatment with FTY, providing hints on how to select therapies towards a more personalized management.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 31%
Other 4 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 8 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 38%
Neuroscience 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 September 2019.
All research outputs
#3,546,850
of 13,786,654 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#716
of 2,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,115
of 355,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#20
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,786,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,660 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 355,935 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.