↓ Skip to main content

Pregnancy decision-making in women with multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pregnancy decision-making in women with multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab
Published in
Neurology, February 2018
DOI 10.1212/wnl.0000000000005068
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emilio Portaccio, Lucia Moiola, Vittorio Martinelli, Pietro Annovazzi, Angelo Ghezzi, Mauro Zaffaroni, Roberta Lanzillo, Vincenzo Brescia Morra, Francesca Rinaldi, Paolo Gallo, Carla Tortorella, Damiano Paolicelli, Carlo Pozzilli, Laura De Giglio, Paola Cavalla, Eleonora Cocco, Maria Giovanna Marrosu, Claudio Solaro, Antonio Uccelli, Alice Laroni, Luisa Pastò, Marta Giannini, Maria Trojano, Giancarlo Comi, Maria Pia Amato, MP Amato, E Portaccio, B Hakiki, L Pastò, M Giannini, L Razzolini, I Righini, G Siracusa, A Ghezzi, P Annovazzi, M Zaffaroni, V Martinelli, M Radaelli, L Moiola, G Comi, A Protti, E Susani, R Marazzi, P Confalonieri, V Torri Clerici, P Cavalla, C Chiavazza, R Bergamaschi, G Mancardi, A Uccelli, E Capello, A Laroni, C Solaro, MR Tola, L Caniatti, F Granella, P Annunziata, K Plewnia, L Guidi, ML Bartolozzi, M. Mazzoni, C Pozzilli, L De Giglio, R Totaro, A Carolei, M Rossi, A Lugaresi, G. De Luca, V Di Tommaso, C Tortorella, D Paolicelli, M D’Onghia, M Trojano, MG Marrosu, E Cocco, M Melis, F Patti, C Leone, S Lo Fermo, P Bellantonio, R Fantozzi, C Gasperini, A Iudice, A Bosco, A Sartori, R Lanzillo, V Brescia Morra

Abstract

To assess the risk of disease reactivation during pregnancy after natalizumab suspension in women with multiple sclerosis (MS). Data of all pregnancies occurring between 2009 and 2015 in patients with MS treated with natalizumab and referring to 19 participating sites were collected and compared with those of pregnancies in untreated patients and patients treated with injectable immunomodulatory agents through a 2-factor repeated measures analysis. Predictors of disease activity were assessed through stepwise multivariable logistic regression models. A total of 92 pregnancies were tracked in 83 women receiving natalizumab. Among these pregnancies, 74 in 70 women resulted in live births, with a postpartum follow-up of at least 1 year, and were compared with 350 previously published pregnancies. Relapse rate during and after pregnancy was higher in women treated with natalizumab (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, longer natalizumab washout period was the only predictor of relapse occurrence during pregnancy (p = 0.001). Relapses in the postpartum year were related to relapses during pregnancy (p = 0.019) and early reintroduction of disease-modifying drugs (DMD; p = 0.021). Disability progression occurred in 16.2% of patients and was reduced by early reintroduction of DMD (p = 0.024). Taken as a whole, our findings indicate that the combination of avoiding natalizumab washout and the early resumption of DMD after delivery could be the best option in the perspective of maternal risk. This approach must take into account possible fetal risks that need to be discussed with the mother and require further investigation. This study provides Class IV evidence that in women with MS, the risk of relapses during pregnancy is higher in those who had been using natalizumab as compared to those who had been using interferon-β or no treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 15%
Other 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Student > Master 6 6%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 28 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 35%
Neuroscience 12 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 29 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 11 August 2018.
All research outputs
#887,522
of 24,991,957 outputs
Outputs from Neurology
#1,553
of 20,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,310
of 448,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurology
#41
of 232 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,991,957 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,859 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 448,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 232 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.