Plasmapheresis in progressive MS

Khatri, Bhupendra; McQuillen, M. P.; Harrington, G. J.; Schmoll, D.; Hoffmann, Raymond G.

doi:10.1212/wnl.35.4.614

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous clinical trials testing the efficacy of PLEX in MS have shown variable, though generally positive results and beneficial clinical effects [4,6,7,14,[16][17][18][19][20]. The MS populations in these studies were not similar and the treatment protocols greatly varied.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In two initial small size studies in 1985 patients with chronic MS were treated with PLEX as an add-on therapy to cyclophosphamide, intramuscular immunoglobulins or steroids and azathioprine [3,4]. The first one showed that significantly more patients in the PLEXgroups stabilized or improved at 5 months, as compared with the sham group.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, PLEX was rather ineffective in most of the studies in chronic progressive or secondary progressive MS [3,4]. In purely progressive MS, a study of combination treatment with azathioprine and PLEX in 8 patients with SPMS led to the conclusion that PLEX did not improve clinical outcomes or prevent the formation of Gd-EDPA enhancing lesins in MRI [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Clinical Efficacy of Plasma-Exchange in Patients with Progressive forms of Multiple Sclerosis and NMO-Spectrum Disease

Petrou¹,

Ben‐Hur²,

Vaknin‐Dembinsky³

et al. 2016

J Mult Scler (Foster City)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical Efficacy of Plasma-Exchange in Patients with Progressive forms of Multiple Sclerosis and NMO-Spectrum Disease

Petrou¹,

Ben‐Hur²,

Vaknin‐Dembinsky³

et al. 2016

J Mult Scler (Foster City)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Whether the analysis included all studies or was limited to experimental clinical reports, there were instances of violation of the condition of homogeneity (see Table I1 below). Sensitivity analyses were performed in an effort to reduce the extent of the disagreements between the was appropriate [29] .) Table I1 shows the results of the meta-analysis when the difference in the mean change in Kurtzke's DSS scores (or expanded disability status scale [EDSS] scores [25]) between the treatment and comparison groups of patients was used as the outcome measure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta‐analysis of clinical studies of the efficacy of plasma exchange in the treatment of chronic progressive multiple sclerosis

Vamvakas¹,

Pineda²,

Weinshenker³

1995

J of Clinical Apheresis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of studies of plasma exchange have been carried out in MS 132,62,108,112,115). A recent double-blind study suggests that there may be beneficial effects in patients given five months of weekly plasma exchange in conjunction with oral cyclophosphamide and prednisone 162).…”

Section: Plasma Exchangementioning

confidence: 99%

Immunotherapy of multiple sclerosis

Weiner

Hafler

1988

Annals of Neurology

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on the assumption that multiple sclerosis is an autoimmune disease, a number of clinical trials designed to suppress the immune system or to restore immune balance in multiple sclerosis have been attempted. Depending on the disease category, the clinical goals of immunotherapy differ. Therapeutic goals include improving recovery from acute attacks, preventing or decreasing the number of relapses, and halting the disease in its progressive stage. The ultimate goal of multiple sclerosis therapy is the early treatment of patients in an attempt to halt the onset of progression. Specific strategies of immunotherapy include generation of a suppressor influence, removal of helper/inducer cells, manipulation of activated T cells, manipulation of class II major histocompatibility complex-bearing cells, alteration of lymphocyte traffic, extracorporeal removal of serum factors or cells, and manipulation of antigen-specific cells. Present treatment modalities are beginning to show some efficacy of nonspecific immunosuppression, but these treatments are limited by their toxicities. As the immunotherapy of multiple sclerosis moves to the next stage in the coming years, patients at an earlier stage of their disease will have to be treated, nontoxic forms of therapy developed, clinical trials lengthened, and a laboratory monitor of the disease developed. Given the positive effects of immunotherapy seen thus far in the disease, it is possible that appropriate immunotherapeutic intervention may provide effective treatment for the disease in the future.

show abstract

Plasmapheresis in progressive MS

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Clinical Efficacy of Plasma-Exchange in Patients with Progressive forms of Multiple Sclerosis and NMO-Spectrum Disease

Clinical Efficacy of Plasma-Exchange in Patients with Progressive forms of Multiple Sclerosis and NMO-Spectrum Disease

Meta‐analysis of clinical studies of the efficacy of plasma exchange in the treatment of chronic progressive multiple sclerosis

Immunotherapy of multiple sclerosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About