INDEX:

Here is a collection of websites by healthcare professionals, National MS Societies, and individual patient or group patients, where you can find information on AHSCT. Some of these websites focus broadly on MS, while others are dedicated specifically to AHSCT. These resources offer a mix of expert insights, official positions from MS Societies, and personal experiences.

Following some of the MS Societies that have discussed AHSCT. The links lead to the sections where this topic is covered.

• MS International Federation, a global movement of MS organizations. See all the MS Societies affiliated with this federation worldwide here.
• MS Society UK
• MS Canada
• MS Trust, national UK charity organization
• AISM, the Italian MS Society
• MS Australia
• National MS Society, USA
• MS Society Switzerland

The following is a list of websites from individual patients or patient associations sharing their direct experiences with AHSCT.

On these websites, you can read firsthand accounts and suggestions, and sometimes even connect directly with patients. Please be cautious when evaluating these sources, as they generally feature more positive accounts than negative ones.

• HSCT Warriors: “This non-profit organization has a mission to promote awareness of hematopoietic stem cell transplant [HSCT] for autoimmune diseases through education, outreach, advocacy, and personal connection. You can access their website (here).”
• Sterkerdan MS: a Dutch website run by a patient association which promotes AHSCT.
• AIMS (Auto Immune and Multiple Sclerosis): “The UK’s first registered charity to support UK residents with Autoimmune Disease and Multiple Sclerosis, with an emphasis on HSCT”. AIMS official website here.
• The Nerve of my MS by Natalie Busari.

🔗 For more, read about patients’ direct experiences.

As part of its educational activities, CureMS.net publishes a newsletter focused on a topic of particular interest. Each issue provides clear insights to help readers better understand the subject and is published in a lay-language version.

The full PDF can be downloaded for free, both in English and Italian. If you would like to receive the newsletter, please write to info@curems.net.

🇮🇹 For Italian newsletters:

• Vaccini EBV (07-01-2026)
• Bavisant Rimielinizzazione (09-02-2026)
• Farmaci generici e biosimilari (aggiornamento al 2026)

🇬🇧 For English newsletters:

• EBV vaccines (07-01-2026)
• Bavisant Remyelination (09-02-2026)
• Generic and biosimilars drugs (updated to 2026)

This section presents study definitions ranked by their methodological strength—from highest to lowest power—consistent with the hierarchy of evidence, as opposed to an alphabetical arrangement.

🔵Meta-analysis: While clinical trials produce new experimental evidence, meta-analyses summarize and integrate existing evidence. Definition according to “A Dictionary of Epidemiology” (Miguel Porta, 2014): “A statistical analysis of results. From separate studies, examining sources of differences in results among studies, and leading to a quantitative summary of the results if the results are judged sufficiently similar to support such synthesis.

Meta-analysis has a qualitative component (i.e., classification of studies according to predetermined characteristics capable of influencing results, such as study design, completeness and quality of data, absence of biases), and a quantitative component (i.e., extraction and analysis of the numerical information).”

🔵Systemic review: According to “A Dictionary of Epidemiology” (Miguel Porta, 2014), a systemic review “focus on peer-reviewed publications about a specific health problem and use rigorous, standardized methods for selecting and assessing articles. A systematic review differs from a meta-analysis in not including a quantitative summary of the results.”

🔵 RCTs: According to “A Dictionary of Epidemiology” (Miguel Porta, 2014), RCTs are “clinical-epidemiological experiment in which subjects are randomly allocated into groups, usually called test and control groups, to receive or not to receive a preventive or a therapeutic procedure or intervention. The results are assessed by comparison of rates of disease, death, recovery, or other appropriate outcome in the study groups. RCTs are generally regarded as the most scientifically rigorous method of hypothesis testing available in epidemiology and medicine.” RCTs are studies that provide robust evidence.

🔵 RCT terminated: In the course of scientific research, the publication of trial results is a crucial step in advancing our knowledge. However, not all trials reach the publication stage due to challenges in recruiting, data collection, unexpected outcomes, methodological issues, or shifts in research focus.

🔵 Observational prospectives: These studies follow a group of individuals over time to track their exposure to certain factors and health outcomes. Researchers analyze the relationship between exposures and outcomes to identify potential health risks.

🔵 Propensity score: Retrospective studies with propensity scores are observational studies that use statistical techniques to reduce bias and simulate some of the characteristics of RCTs. We must take keep in mind that propensity score presents limitations as outlined by Austin et al., 2021. “Propensity score methods allow one to remove the effects of confounding due to measured baseline covariates. They make no claim to remove the effects of confounding due to unmeasured covariates, and findings from observational studies must be interpreted with care given this potential for residual confounding (a limitation shared by regression adjustment)”. More on this topic here.

🔵 Observational retrospectives: “Retrospective cohort studies, also known as historical cohort studies, are carried out at the present time and look to the past to examine medical events or outcomes. In other words, a cohort of subjects selected based on exposure status is chosen at the present time, and outcome data (i.e. disease status, event status), which was measured in the past, are reconstructed for analysis.” (Song et al., 2010).

These studies are “observational” because the researchers do not intervene or alter the course of events; instead, they analyze past data to find correlations or outcomes.

🔵 Case-series: A definition of case series according to NIH “A group or series of case reports involving patients who were given similar treatment. Reports of case series usually contain detailed information about the individual patients. This includes demographic information (for example, age, gender, ethnic origin) and information on diagnosis, treatment, response to treatment, and follow-up after treatment”

🔵 Expert opinion: A definition according to the “European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)”: “Expert opinions are scientific views or comments by a group of designated experts based on a review of scientific evidence and/or expert opinion.”