Efficacy and Safety of Vamorolone in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A Systematic Review.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS Pediatric Drugs Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-27 DOI:10.1007/s40272-024-00655-5
Carlos Pascual-Morena, Maribel Lucerón-Lucas-Torres, Irene Martínez-García, Eva Rodríguez-Gutiérrez, Silvana Patiño-Cardona, Irene Sequí-Domínguez
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Vamorolone in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Carlos Pascual-Morena, Maribel Lucerón-Lucas-Torres, Irene Martínez-García, Eva Rodríguez-Gutiérrez, Silvana Patiño-Cardona, Irene Sequí-Domínguez","doi":"10.1007/s40272-024-00655-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Vamorolone has recently been approved for the management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy to replace glucocorticosteroids, which theoretically have more side effects. However, its efficacy and safety profile is unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to assess the efficacy of vamorolone in Duchenne muscular dystrophy through the 6-minute walk test (6MWT), the North Star Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA), time to stand velocity (TTSTAND), time to run 10 m (TTRW), time to climb four stairs (TTCLIMB) and a safety profile.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to June 2024 (PROSPERO: CRD42024558413) for studies evaluating the effect or safety profile of vamorolone in a population with Duchenne muscular dystrophy on 6MWT, NSAA and TTSTAND. TTRW, TTCLIMB and a safety profile were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool (RoB2) and the Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After (Pre-Post) Studies with No Control Group from the US National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, depending on the type of design. Results were expressed as mean differences or proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), depending on the outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six studies with a total of 145 individuals with Duchenne muscular dystrophy and a baseline age between 4.7 and 5.5 years were included in the systematic review. Overall, the most effective dose was 6 mg/kg/day. At 24 weeks, this dose showed a statistically significant effect compared with the untreated cohorts of 41.60 m (95% CI 14.30, 68.90) on the 6MWT, 3.57 points (95% CI 1.89, 5.25) on the NSAA, 0.06 events/s (95% CI 0.02, 0.10) on the TTSTAND, approximately 0.25 m/s on the TTRW and 0.04 (95% CI -0.00, 0.08) to 0.07 events/s (95% CI 0.03, 0.11) on the TTCLIMB. There was some discrepancy in the statistical significance of some studies, although the direction of the effect was usually similar. In general, the effect was maintained in the extension studies. Adverse events were less frequent than in historical cohorts treated with glucocorticoids. Finally, the risk of bias in the included studies was low.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>According to our results, vamorolone offers a statistically and clinically significant benefit in the management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, with fewer side effects than glucocorticoids. However, the number of studies limits the interpretability and generalisability of these data, requiring more studies with more participants to perform a meta-analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":19955,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Drugs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40272-024-00655-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Vamorolone has recently been approved for the management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy to replace glucocorticosteroids, which theoretically have more side effects. However, its efficacy and safety profile is unclear.

Objective: We aimed to assess the efficacy of vamorolone in Duchenne muscular dystrophy through the 6-minute walk test (6MWT), the North Star Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA), time to stand velocity (TTSTAND), time to run 10 m (TTRW), time to climb four stairs (TTCLIMB) and a safety profile.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to June 2024 (PROSPERO: CRD42024558413) for studies evaluating the effect or safety profile of vamorolone in a population with Duchenne muscular dystrophy on 6MWT, NSAA and TTSTAND. TTRW, TTCLIMB and a safety profile were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool (RoB2) and the Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After (Pre-Post) Studies with No Control Group from the US National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, depending on the type of design. Results were expressed as mean differences or proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), depending on the outcome.

Results: Six studies with a total of 145 individuals with Duchenne muscular dystrophy and a baseline age between 4.7 and 5.5 years were included in the systematic review. Overall, the most effective dose was 6 mg/kg/day. At 24 weeks, this dose showed a statistically significant effect compared with the untreated cohorts of 41.60 m (95% CI 14.30, 68.90) on the 6MWT, 3.57 points (95% CI 1.89, 5.25) on the NSAA, 0.06 events/s (95% CI 0.02, 0.10) on the TTSTAND, approximately 0.25 m/s on the TTRW and 0.04 (95% CI -0.00, 0.08) to 0.07 events/s (95% CI 0.03, 0.11) on the TTCLIMB. There was some discrepancy in the statistical significance of some studies, although the direction of the effect was usually similar. In general, the effect was maintained in the extension studies. Adverse events were less frequent than in historical cohorts treated with glucocorticoids. Finally, the risk of bias in the included studies was low.

Conclusions: According to our results, vamorolone offers a statistically and clinically significant benefit in the management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, with fewer side effects than glucocorticoids. However, the number of studies limits the interpretability and generalisability of these data, requiring more studies with more participants to perform a meta-analysis.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
伐莫龙治疗杜兴氏肌肉萎缩症的疗效和安全性:系统回顾
背景:瓦莫洛尔酮最近被批准用于治疗杜氏肌营养不良症,以取代理论上副作用更大的糖皮质激素。然而,其疗效和安全性尚不明确:我们旨在通过 6 分钟步行测试 (6MWT)、北极星活动评估 (NSAA)、站立速度时间 (TTSTAND)、跑 10 米时间 (TTRW)、爬四级楼梯时间 (TTCLIMB) 评估伐莫洛龙对杜氏肌营养不良症的疗效以及安全性:方法:在 MEDLINE、Scopus、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 图书馆(从开始到 2024 年 6 月)(PROSPERO:CRD42024558413)中进行了系统性检索,以了解评估伐莫龙对杜氏肌营养不良患者在 6MWT、NSAA 和 TTSTAND 方面的效果或安全性的研究。纳入了 TTRW、TTCLIMB 和安全性概况。根据设计类型,采用 Cochrane 协作组织的偏倚风险工具 (RoB2) 和美国国立卫生研究院国家心肺血液研究所的无对照组前后(前-后)研究质量评估工具对偏倚风险进行评估。根据结果的不同,研究结果以平均差异或比例及 95% 置信区间 (CI) 表示:系统综述共纳入了六项研究,涉及 145 名杜兴氏肌肉萎缩症患者,基线年龄在 4.7 岁至 5.5 岁之间。总体而言,最有效的剂量为 6 毫克/千克/天。在 24 周时,与未接受治疗的组群相比,该剂量显示出显著的统计学效果:6MWT 上升 41.60 米(95% CI 14.30,68.90),NSAA 上升 3.57 分(95% CI 1.89,5.25),NSAA 上升 3.57 分(95% CI 1.89,5.25)。在 NSAA 上得到 3.57 分(95% CI 为 1.89,5.25),在 TTSTAND 上得到 0.06 次/秒(95% CI 为 0.02,0.10),在 TTRW 上得到约 0.25 米/秒,在 TTCLIMB 上得到 0.04(95% CI 为 -0.00,0.08)至 0.07 次/秒(95% CI 为 0.03,0.11)。一些研究的统计意义存在一些差异,但效果的方向通常相似。总体而言,疗效在扩展研究中得以保持。与使用糖皮质激素治疗的历史队列相比,不良反应发生率较低。最后,纳入研究的偏倚风险较低:根据我们的研究结果,瓦莫洛尔酮在治疗杜氏肌营养不良症方面具有统计学和临床意义上的显著疗效,且副作用少于糖皮质激素。然而,研究的数量限制了这些数据的可解释性和普遍性,需要更多的研究和更多的参与者来进行荟萃分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Pediatric Drugs
Pediatric Drugs PEDIATRICS-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pediatric Drugs promotes the optimization and advancement of all aspects of pharmacotherapy for healthcare professionals interested in pediatric drug therapy (including vaccines). The program of review and original research articles provides healthcare decision makers with clinically applicable knowledge on issues relevant to drug therapy in all areas of neonatology and the care of children and adolescents. The Journal includes: -overviews of contentious or emerging issues. -comprehensive narrative reviews of topics relating to the effective and safe management of drug therapy through all stages of pediatric development. -practical reviews covering optimum drug management of specific clinical situations. -systematic reviews that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement. -Adis Drug Reviews of the properties and place in therapy of both newer and established drugs in the pediatric population. -original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies with a strong link to clinical practice, such as clinical pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies, clinical trials, meta-analyses, outcomes research, and pharmacoeconomic and pharmacoepidemiological studies. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Pediatric Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.
期刊最新文献
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Antimicrobial Drugs in Children with Cancer: A New Tool for Personalized Medicine. Clinical Evidence Supporting FDA Approval of Gene and RNA Therapies for Rare Inherited Conditions.  Pediatric Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy: Challenges in Diagnosis and Therapeutic Strategies. Targeted Treatments for Myasthenia Gravis in Children and Adolescents. Preventing Recurrence of Crohn's Disease Post-Ileocaecal Surgery in Paediatric Patients: A Therapy Guide Based on Systematic Review of the Evidence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1