Lipoatrophy in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis on Glatiramer Acetate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis on the disease modifying therapy of glatiramer acetate may be experiencing an adverse reaction of lipoatrophy at the sites of their subcutaneous injections. The purpose of this study was to complete a full examination of the injection site areas for users of glatiramer acetate, and to examine the relationship between lipoatrophy and patient characteristics. METHODS: Glatiramer acetate users were identified by means of chart review. Over six months, during regular clinic appointments, assessment included a full examination of injection site areas including visual inspection and manual palpation. Additional patient and clinical characteristics were obtained by means of chart review and patient questioning. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients had been or were current users of glatiramer acetate. Of these, 34 (45%) had evidence of lipoatrophy in at least one injection site area. All were female, and five had severe, nine had moderate and 20 had mild lipoatrophy. In some cases, lipoatrophy occurred within months of therapy initiation. Case reviews are included for five of the 34 patients, along with photographs of the lipoatrophy, a magnetic resonance image and comments on skin biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of lipoatrophy was much higher than expected. Possible reasons for this adverse reaction are explored and suggested treatment recommendations are reviewed. Lipoatrophy can be very disfiguring and is thought to be permanent, and the psychological impact can be significant. It is, therefore, important that patients be aware of the possibility of lipoatrophy, be able to identify it and discontinue injecting in areas where it is identified.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".