Needed in MS

This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.

In an ideal world, clinicians would decide on the relative merits of treatments based on high-quality evidence from randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trials. The need for such evidence is particularly acute when there are several treatments available but no trials comparing efficacy. In this issue of Neurology , two randomized clinical trials report the relative benefits of different strategies of MS treatment with parenteral interferons. Although both interferon β-1a and interferon β-1b have been shown to delay the progression of disability in relapsing-remitting MS, there remains uncertainty about the relative benefits of the products available, as well as the optimal dosage, route, and frequency of administration of those products. The study by Clanet et al.1 was a randomized, double-blind, parallel group trial of two dosages of interferon β-1a. The participants were followed for a minimum of 3 years and the primary outcome variable was the time from randomization until a sustained increase of 1 or more points on …