ReviewNeurology. Clinical practice2020
Immediate reactions with glatiramer acetate: Diagnosis of allergy and desensitization protocols.
Review in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Demyelination to Intervention: Natural Compounds as Emerging Therapeutic Targets in Multiple Sclerosis Neuroinflammation.Journal of immunology research · 2026Review
- Adverse side effects of Glatiramer acetate and Interferon beta-1a in patients with multiple sclerosis: A systematic review of case reports.Current journal of neurology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewDiverse adverse events have been associated with administration of glatiramer acetate (GA), mainly local reactions at the injection site. Other, less frequent generalized reactions include isolated postinjection reactions and anaphylaxis, which may lead to discontinuation of GA. RECENT
findingsClose collaboration between the allergy and neurology departments is needed to study adverse reactions to GA. The allergy study should include a detailed history and skin prick and intradermal tests with GA and, if possible, determination of specific IgE levels. Furthermore, the implication of other drugs should be ruled out. SUMMARY: An accurate diagnosis of reactions to GA is essential if we are to confirm or rule out allergy to GA. When an allergy diagnosis is confirmed or firmly suspected based on clinical evidence, desensitization protocols are increasingly seen as safe methods for reintroduction of GA.
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.