It's not my data, it's their's . . . but I agree nine people is not enough to prove statistical significance. Twenty-one people were screened for that trial, but only 9 were accepted. Part of that protocol included that they had to be:

- Aggressive RRMS
- 2 or more gad-enhancing lesions
- 1 exacerbation in the preceeding 12 months
- no exacerbation in the last 3 months

*The median age at time of entry was 29 yrs old.*

Two of the people received either steroids or rituximab during the follow-up period, and the trial did not count exacerbations that did not SHOW active inflammation, by way of a MRI. I don't think this is an accurate assessment, since we already know that a HUGE % of lesions are not even visible on a MRI . . . but whatever. Either way, I think it would be fair to take those two out of the equation, since it was likely the other treatments they used helped to reduced their EDSS.

Of the 7 remaining, two saw no improvement in EDSS, but no advancement either. That is not necessarily uncommon for someone with early RRMS.

Some saw substantial improvement in EDSS, as much as 100% in one case.

Their gad-enhanced lesions seemed to stabilize quite a bit over this period, but this reduction did not seem to correlate with a reduction in EDSS, ie. even if they had/did not have Gad-enhancing lesions, their EDSS still fluctuated.

Sorry, I don't really have time right at the moment to analyze all the information in detail, but here it is:

http://archneur.ama-assn.org/cgi/rep...noc80042v1.pdf

Cherie