| Résumé : | Résumé extrait de la "Cochrane Library"
Background
Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is caused by a homozygous deletion of the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene on chromosome 5, or a heterozygous deletion in combination with a point mutation in the second SMN1 allele. This results in degeneration of anterior horn cells, which leads to progressive muscle weakness. By definition, children with SMA type I are never able to sit without support and usually die or become ventilator dependent before the age of two years. There have until very recently been no drug treatments to influence the course of SMA. We undertook this updated review to evaluate new evidence on emerging treatments for SMA type I. The review was first published in 2009 and previously updated in 2011.
Objectives
To assess the efficacy and safety of any drug therapy designed to slow or arrest progression of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) type I.
Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ISI Web of Science conference proceedings in October 2018. We also searched two trials registries to identify unpublished trials (October 2018).
Main results
We identified two RCTs: one trial of intrathecal nusinersen in comparison to a sham (control) procedure in 121 randomised infants with SMA type I, which was newly included at this update, and one small trial comparing riluzole treatment to placebo in 10 children with SMA type I.
The RCT of intrathecally‐injected nusinersen was stopped early for efficacy (based on a predefined Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination‐Section 2 (HINE‐2) response). At the interim analyses after 183 days of treatment, 41% (21/51) of nusinersen‐treated infants showed a predefined improvement on HINE‐2, compared to 0% (0/27) of participants in the control group. This trial was largely at low risk of bias.
Final analyses (ranging from 6 months to 13 months of treatment), showed that fewer participants died or required full‐time ventilation (defined as more than 16 hours daily for 21 days or more) in the nusinersen‐treated group than the control group (hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.89; N = 121; a 47% lower risk; moderate‐certainty evidence). A proportion of infants in the nusinersen group and none of 37 infants in the control group achieved motor milestones: 37/73 nusinersen‐treated infants (51%) achieved a motor milestone response on HINE‐2 (risk ratio (RR) 38.51, 95% CI 2.43 to 610.14; N = 110; moderate‐certainty evidence); 16/73 achieved head control (RR 16.95, 95% CI 1.04 to 274.84; moderate‐certainty evidence); 6/73 achieved independent sitting (RR 6.68, 95% CI 0.39 to 115.38; moderate‐certainty evidence); 7/73 achieved rolling over (RR 7.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 131.29); and 1/73 achieved standing (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.06 to 36.92; moderate‐certainty evidence). Seventy‐one per cent of nusinersen‐treated infants versus 3% of infants in the control group were responders on the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Infant Test of Neuromuscular Disorders (CHOP INTEND) measure of motor disability (RR 26.36, 95% CI 3.79 to 183.18; N = 110; moderate‐certainty evidence).
Adverse events and serious adverse events occurred in the majority of infants but were no more frequent in the nusinersen‐treated group than the control group (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.05 and RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89, respectively; N = 121; moderate‐certainty evidence).
In the riluzole trial, three of seven children treated with riluzole were still alive at the ages of 30, 48, and 64 months, whereas all three children in the placebo group died. None of the children in the riluzole or placebo group developed the ability to sit, which was the only milestone reported. There were no adverse effects. The certainty of the evidence for all measured outcomes from this study was very low, because the study was too small to detect or rule out an effect, and had serious limitations, including baseline differences. This trial was stopped prematurely because the pharmaceutical company withdrew funding.
Various trials and studies investigating treatment strategies other than nusinersen, such as SMN2 augmentation by small molecules, are ongoing.
Authors' conclusions
Based on the very limited evidence currently available regarding drug treatments for SMA type 1, intrathecal nusinersen probably prolongs ventilation‐free and overall survival in infants with SMA type I. It is also probable that a greater proportion of infants treated with nusinersen than with a sham procedure achieve motor milestones and can be classed as responders to treatment on clinical assessments (HINE‐2 and CHOP INTEND). The proportion of children experiencing adverse events and serious adverse events on nusinersen is no higher with nusinersen treatment than with a sham procedure, based on evidence of moderate certainty. It is uncertain whether riluzole has any effect in patients with SMA type I, based on the limited available evidence. Future trials could provide more high‐certainty, longer‐term evidence to confirm this result, or focus on comparing new treatments to nusinersen or evaluate them as an add‐on therapy to nusinersen.
|
trié(s) par (Pertinence décroissant(e), Date de parution décroissant(e), Date de parution décroissant(e), Système de projection du document croissant(e)) Mettre toutes les notices dans le panier Faire une suggestion Ajouter un critère de recherche
