Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2003;326:1213 (31 May), doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1213
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORWe agree with Sudlow and Counsell that the evidence for the risk sharing scheme for interferon beta and glatiramer in multiple sclerosis is poor.1 There are serious clinical and scientific flaws in advocating immunological treatments for multiple sclerosis.2 Before committing precious resources to any trial involving several thousand patients as proposed1 we have to be clear about the primary end point. In our view, it can only be the prevention of long term disability rather than reduction of short term fluctuations related to relapses.
Progressive neurological disability in multiple sclerosis is due to
neuronal loss. Widespread axonal damage is always present even at the earliest
clinical stages of the disease and is independent of the inflammatory
changes.3 Multiple
sclerosis is not an autoimmune disease and experience has shown that
azathioprine is not effective. Investing in a long term randomised trial of
"interferon beta or glatiramer versus azathioprine versus
Abhijit Chaudhuri, senior lecturer in clinical neurosciences
ac54p@udcf.gla.ac.uk
Peter O Behan, emeritus professor of neurology
University of Glasgow Department of Neurology, Institute of Neurological Sciences, South Glasgow University Hospitals NHS Trust, Glasgow G51 4TF