When confronted with an unsatisfactory response to treatment, the physician has to
decide what to do next. Should one give more of the same treatment, or change to a
different treatment? Was the treatment not effective for the disease, or was the amount
given insufficient? Should one try harder with the same approach, or do something
different? Drs. Kim and Kim raise this question in regard to our recent report of
our experience with rituximab (RTX) in neuromyelitis optica (NMO) [
[1]
], and suggest that our patients received insufficient treatment. We disagree, and
are not convinced that RTX is of benefit for all cases of NMO.To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of the Neurological SciencesAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Variable results after rituximab in neuromyelitis optica.J Neurol Sci. 2012; 317: 103-105
- White matter disease: optimizing rituximab therapy for neuromyelitis optica.Nat Rev Neurol. 2011; 12: 664-665
- Repeated treatment with rituximab based on the assessment of peripheral circulating memory B cells in patients with relapsing neuromyelitis optica over 2 years.Arch Neurol. 2011; 68: 1412-1420
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 28, 2012
Accepted:
May 3,
2012
Received:
April 20,
2012
Identification
Copyright
© 2012 Elsevier B.V. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
