Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 429

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Glatiramer acetate in primary progressive multiple sclerosis: Results of a multinational, multicenter, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial

Open access
Wolinsky, Jerry S., Narayana, Ponnada A., O'Connor, Paul, Coyle, Patricia K., Ford, Corey, Johnson, Kenneth, Miller, Aaron, Pardo, Lillian, Kadosh, Shaul, Ladkani, David, PROMiSe Trial Study Group·2007·Annals of Neurology

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether glatiramer acetate (GA) slows accumulation of disability in primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Methods: A total of 943 patients with primary progressive multiple sclerosis were randomized to GA or placebo (PBO) in this 3‐year, double‐blind trial. The primary end point was an intention‐to‐treat analysis of time to 1‐ (entry expanded disability status scale, 3.0–5.0) or 0.5‐point expanded disability status scale change (entry expanded disability status scale, 5.5–6.5) sustained for 3 months. The trial was stopped after an interim analysis by an independent data safety monitoring board indicated no discernible treatment effect on the primary outcome. Intention‐to‐treat analyses of disability and magnetic resonance imaging end points were performed. Results: There was a nonsignificant delay in time to sustained accumulated disability in GA‐ versus PBO‐treated patients (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% confidence interval, 0.71–1.07]; p = 0.1753), with significant decreases in enhancing lesions in year 1 and smaller increases in T2 lesion volumes in years 2 and 3 versus PBO. Post hoc analysis showed that survival curves for GA‐treated male patients diverged early from PBO‐treated male subjects (hazard ratio, 0.71 [95% confidence interval, 0.53–0.95]; p = 0.0193). Interpretation: The trial failed to demonstrate a treatment effect of GA on primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Both the unanticipated low event rate and premature discontinuation of study medication decreased the power to detect a treatment effect. Post hoc analysis suggests GA may have slowed clinical progression in male patients who showed more rapid progression when untreated. Ann Neurol 2007;61:14–24

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ana.21079

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 429

Metadata

Authors
Wolinsky, J. S., Narayana, P. A., O'Connor, P., Coyle, P. K., Ford, C., Johnson, K., Miller, A., Pardo, L., Kadosh, S., Ladkani, D., & PROMiSe Trial Study Group
Venue
Annals of Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-01
Volume
61
Issue
1
Pages
14-24
ISSN
  • 0364-5134 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-8249
OpenAlex
W2046941822
Cited by
429
References
1
FWCI
16.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Glatiramer acetate in primary progressive multiple sclerosis: Results of a multinational, multicenter, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ana.21079
The paper
Wolinsky, J. S., Narayana, P. A., O'Connor, P., Coyle, P. K., Ford, C., Johnson, K., Miller, A., Pardo, L., Kadosh, S., Ladkani, D., & PROMiSe Trial Study Group. (2007). Glatiramer acetate in primary progressive multiple sclerosis: Results of a multinational, multicenter, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial. Annals of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.21079

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.