This is open source journal and so you can read it if interested. There are the views of some Spanish Neuos and they talk about switching to and from cladribine and what to do after 4 years, which is surely where the expert guidance is needed in the face of no evidence on how best to proceed., To redose in the absence of acivity or watch and wait as would be done with alemtuzumab
What did the facilitator suggest and how did the questions arise?
It says”Participants were asked whether they agreed or not with statements made by a facilitator and to discuss them until they reached consensus”
As soon as I saw the colours of the figures, this appears as a corporate presentation typically seen meetings posters on cladribine and indeed it was supported by the manufacturer with they paid for a medical writer so whilst it may be independent of the manufacturer they will probably have seen it before it was submitted. The faciltator gave a suggestion and asked for agreement and so is it like video assisted refereeing (VAR) in football? The on field referee seldom overturns the VAR suggestion.?
To be honest the title sort of gave it away as a corporate supported prublication.
However, there is no reason to think the participants did not give there own views independent of other influences.
Meca-Lallana V, García Domínguez JM, López Ruiz R, Martín-Martínez J, Arés Luque A, Hernández Pérez MA, Prieto González JM, Landete Pascual L, Sastre-Garriga J. Expert-Agreed Practical Recommendations on the Use of Cladribine. Neurol Ther. 2022 Sep 6. doi: 10.1007/s40120-022-00394-0
Disclaimer The views are those of the author and no body else