↓ Skip to main content

Sub-analysis of geographical variations in the 2-year observational COPTIMIZE trial of patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis converting to glatiramer acetate

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sub-analysis of geographical variations in the 2-year observational COPTIMIZE trial of patients with relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis converting to glatiramer acetate
Published in
BMC Neurology, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12883-015-0448-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tjalf Ziemssen, Yossi Gilgun-Sherki

Abstract

Studies suggest that patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) who fail to benefit from a disease-modifying treatment (DMT) may benefit from converting to another DMT class. COPTIMIZE was a 24-month observational study designed to assess the disease course of patients converting to glatiramer acetate (GA) 20 mg daily from another DMT and the association of disease characteristics and reasons for converting. This sub-analysis was to determine if any findings varied by three geographic locations: Latin America (LA), Canada and Western Europe (CWE), and Eastern Europe (EE). A total of 668 patients were included (263 LA, 248 CWE, 157 EE) in an analysis of annualized relapse rate (ARR) and annualized rate of deterioration (ARD), as well as secondary endpoints including reason for DMT switch and changes in disability and fatigue scores. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and log transformation were used to analyze ARR and ARD, whereas the Wilcoxon signed rank test was used for secondary endpoints. The sub-analysis of treatment outcomes stratified by region showed that Latin American patients had higher ARR before conversion to GA compared with patients from the other two areas and subsequently experienced the largest reduction in ARR. Latin American patients also had higher baseline rates of comorbidities and relapses with incomplete remissions and improved more than those in the other two regions based on measures of fatigue, quality of life, depression, and cognition scores. Latin American patients also generally had a better perception of the benefits associated with their conversion to GA in terms of efficacy and adverse events. These findings indicate that, in RRMS patients, converting to GA is associated with positive treatment outcomes regardless of geographic location. However, the reasons for converting and the type and degree of any associated benefits appear to vary depending on various factors, including patients' geographical location.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 17%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Researcher 5 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 17 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 14%
Psychology 6 10%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 25 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 May 2016.
All research outputs
#14,698,802
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,334
of 2,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,721
of 278,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#33
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,190 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.