MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414443225 · doi:10.1080/14728214.2025.2565189

Future treatments for myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease: the clinical trial landscape

2025· review· en· W4414443225 on OpenAlexaff
Edgar Carnero Contentti, Vinícius Boldrini, Adriana Casallas‐Vanegas, Sanja Gluščević, Emine Rabia Koç, Sara Samadzadeh, Meral Seferoğlu, Natalia Szejko, Michael Levy

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Emerging Drugs · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical trialMyelin oligodendrocyte glycoproteinMultiple sclerosisImmunotherapyClinical neurologyTargeted therapyDiseaseMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease (MOGAD) is an emerging autoimmune demyelinating disorder distinct from multiple sclerosis and AQP4-IgG-positive neuromyelitis optica. Despite increasing recognition, no therapies are currently approved for MOGAD, and treatment remains empirical, with significant variability in clinical response and access to care. AREAS COVERED: This review explores the evolving treatment landscape of adult MOGAD, with a focus on immunotherapies under active clinical investigation: azathioprine, tocilizumab, satralizumab, and rozanolixizumab. For each agent, we discuss mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetics, dosing, safety, and efficacy based on clinical trials and observational data. Literature was identified through PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov, including ongoing phase 2/3 studies (MOGwAI, TOMATO, METEOROID, and cosMOG). EXPERT OPINION: Targeted immunotherapies have the potential to transform MOGAD management. In the next five years, one or more of these agents may achieve regulatory approval, particularly if biomarker-driven strategies and trial designs are refined. Addressing unmet needs in pediatric populations and low-resource settings will be essential to ensure equitable, personalized treatment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.119
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.375 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Opinion on Emerging DrugsSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207