ArticleeNeurologicalSci2018
Physicochemical, biological, functional and toxicological characterization of the European follow-on glatiramer acetate product as compared with Copaxone.
Article in eNeurologicalSci, 2018. 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, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- A narrative review on the safety of glatiramer acetate in multiple sclerosis: focus on Europe.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2025Review
- Exploiting Pharma 4.0 Technologies in the Non-Biological Complex Drugs Manufacturing: Innovations and Implications.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Development of Pharmaceutical Nanomedicines: From the Bench to the Market.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Mitochondrial toxicity evaluation of traditional Chinese medicine injections with a dualFrontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Article
- Letter to the Editor Regarding: A Comprehensive Review on CopemylNeurology and therapy · 2018Article
- Article
- Follow-on glatiramer acetate.eNeurologicalSci · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For more than 20 years, Copaxone (glatiramer acetate, Teva), a non-biological complex drug, has been a safe and effective treatment option for multiple sclerosis. In 2016, a follow-on glatiramer acetate product (FOGA, Synthon) was approved in the EU. Traditional bulk-based methods and high-resolution assays were employed to evaluate the physicochemical, functional, and bio-recognition attributes, as well as the in vivo toxicity profile of the active substances in Copaxone and Synthon EU FOGA lots. These tests included quality control tests applied routinely in release of Copaxone lots, as well as additional characterization assays, gene expression studies and a rat toxicity study. Even though the Synthon FOGA was designed to copy and compete with Copaxone, the active substances were found to be similar in only 7 of the tested 14 (50%) methods (similar is defined as within approved specifications or within the inherent microheterogeneity range of tested Copaxone batches, or not showing statistically significant differences). With additional methods applied, consistent compositional differences in attributes of surface charge distribution, molecular size, and spatial arrangement were observed. These marked differences were concordantly observed with higher biological activity of some of the Synthon EU FOGA lots compared with Copaxone lots, including potency and cytotoxicity activities as well as gene expression of pathways that regulate apoptosis, IL-2, and inflammation signaling. These observations raise concerns for immunogenicity differences, particularly in (repeated) substitution settings. Another orthogonal finding demonstrated increased frequency of injection-site local toxicity observations for the Synthon EU FOGA in an in vivo daily dosing rat study, thus warranting further qualification of the link between compositional and functional differences in immunogenicity, and potential impact on long-term efficacy and safety.
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.