ArticleScientific reports2015
Gene expression studies of a human monocyte cell line identify dissimilarities between differently manufactured glatiramoids.
Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrated bioinformatics and experimental analysis identify apoptosis- and pyroptosis-related hub genes as candidate diagnostic biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease.Journal of applied genetics · 2026Article
- A narrative review on the safety of glatiramer acetate in multiple sclerosis: focus on Europe.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2025Review
- Article
- Letter to the Editor Regarding: A Comprehensive Review on CopemylNeurology and therapy · 2018Article
- Article
- Physicochemical, biological, functional and toxicological characterization of the European follow-on glatiramer acetate product as compared with Copaxone.eNeurologicalSci · 2018Article
- A pharmacogenetic signature of high response to Copaxone in late-phase clinical-trial cohorts of multiple sclerosis.Genome medicine · 2017Article
- Demonstration of Biological and Immunological Equivalence of a Generic Glatiramer Acetate.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Glatiramer Acetate (GA) has provided safe and effective treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) patients for two decades. It acts as an antigen, yet the precise mechanism of action remains to be fully elucidated, and no validated pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic biomarkers exist. In order to better characterize GA's biological impact, genome-wide expression studies were conducted with a human monocyte (THP-1) cell line. Consistent with previous literature, branded GA upregulated anti-inflammatory markers (e.g. IL10), and modulated multiple immune-related pathways. Despite some similarities, significant differences were observed between expression profiles induced by branded GA and Probioglat, a differently-manufactured glatiramoid purported to be a generic GA. Key results were verified using qRT-PCR. Genes (e.g. CCL5, adj. p < 4.1 × 10(-5)) critically involved in pro-inflammatory pathways (e.g. response to lipopolysaccharide, adj. p = 8.7 × 10(-4)) were significantly induced by Probioglat compared with branded GA. Key genes were also tested and confirmed at the protein level, and in primary human monocytes. These observations suggest differential biological impact by the two glatiramoids and warrant further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.