↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Corticosteroids or ACTH for acute exacerbations in multiple sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2000
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

3 Wikipedia pages


175 Dimensions

Readers on

223 Mendeley
Corticosteroids or ACTH for acute exacerbations in multiple sclerosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2000
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001331
Pubmed ID

Antonietta Citterio, Loredana La Mantia, Gabriele Ciucci, Livia Candelise, Fabio Brusaferri, Rune Midgard, Graziella Filippini


Corticosteroids are often used to improve the rate of recovery from acute exacerbation in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. However, it is still unclear just how relatively effective these agents are and the type of drug, optimal dose, frequency, duration of treatment and route of administration are unknown. The object of this review was to determine the efficacy and safety of corticosteroids or ACTH in reducing the short and long term morbidity from MS. Moreover, we wished to examine from indirect comparisons if the effect of corticosteroids is different according to different doses and drugs, routes of administration, length of treatment. A search strategy developed for the Cochrane MS Group (last searched: June 1999) completed with handsearching and personal contacts with trialists and pharmaceutical companies was used. All randomised, double-blind, unconfounded trials comparing corticosteroids or ACTH to placebo in patients with MS, treated for acute exacerbations, without any age or severity restrictions, were evaluated. Two reviewers independently selected articles for inclusion, assessed trials' quality and extracted the data. A third reviewer cross-checked them and disagreements were resolved by a joint discussion. Six trials contributed to this review; a total of 377 participants (199 treatment, 178 placebo) were randomised. The drugs analysed were methylprednisolone (MP) (four trials, 140 patients) and ACTH (two trials, 237 patients). Overall, MP or ACTH showed a protective effect against the disease getting worse or stable within the first five weeks of treatment (odds ratio[OR]=0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.24-0.57) with some but non significant greater effect for MP and intravenous administration. Short (five days) or long (15 days) duration of treatment with MP did not show any significant difference. Only one study (with 51 patients) reported data after one year of follow-up: no difference between oral MP and placebo in the prevention of new exacerbations or improvement in long term disability was detected. No data are available beyond one year of follow-up to indicate whether steroids or ACTH have any effect on long-term progression. One study reported that a short term treatment with high dose intravenous MP was not attended by adverse events. On the contrary, gastrointestinal symptoms and psychic disorders were significantly more common in the oral, high-dose MP than in the placebo group. Weight gain and edema were significantly more frequent in the ACTH group than in controls. We found evidence favouring the corticosteroid MP for acute exacerbation in MS patients. Data are insufficient to reliably estimate effect of corticosteroids on prevention of new exacerbations and reduction of long-term disability. Studies assessing long term risk/benefit and adverse effects of corticosteroids in MS patients are urgently needed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 217 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 12%
Student > Master 27 12%
Student > Bachelor 19 9%
Other 19 9%
Other 41 18%
Unknown 62 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 78 35%
Neuroscience 16 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 5%
Psychology 8 4%
Other 28 13%
Unknown 70 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 12 December 2020.
All research outputs
of 22,780,967 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 39,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,967 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 39,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.