Cargando…
Intravitreal Gene Therapy vs. Natural History in Patients With Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Carrying the m.11778G>A ND4 Mutation: Systematic Review and Indirect Comparison
Objective: This work aimed to compare the evolution of visual outcomes in Leber hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON) patients treated with intravitreal gene therapy to the spontaneous evolution in prior natural history (NH) studies. Design: A combined analysis of two phase three randomized, double-mas...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8181419/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34108929 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.662838 |
_version_ | 1783704092059631616 |
---|---|
author | Newman, Nancy J. Yu-Wai-Man, Patrick Carelli, Valerio Biousse, Valerie Moster, Mark L. Vignal-Clermont, Catherine Sergott, Robert C. Klopstock, Thomas Sadun, Alfredo A. Girmens, Jean-François La Morgia, Chiara DeBusk, Adam A. Jurkute, Neringa Priglinger, Claudia Karanjia, Rustum Josse, Constant Salzmann, Julie Montestruc, François Roux, Michel Taiel, Magali Sahel, José-Alain |
author_facet | Newman, Nancy J. Yu-Wai-Man, Patrick Carelli, Valerio Biousse, Valerie Moster, Mark L. Vignal-Clermont, Catherine Sergott, Robert C. Klopstock, Thomas Sadun, Alfredo A. Girmens, Jean-François La Morgia, Chiara DeBusk, Adam A. Jurkute, Neringa Priglinger, Claudia Karanjia, Rustum Josse, Constant Salzmann, Julie Montestruc, François Roux, Michel Taiel, Magali Sahel, José-Alain |
author_sort | Newman, Nancy J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective: This work aimed to compare the evolution of visual outcomes in Leber hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON) patients treated with intravitreal gene therapy to the spontaneous evolution in prior natural history (NH) studies. Design: A combined analysis of two phase three randomized, double-masked, sham-controlled studies (REVERSE and RESCUE) and their joint long-term extension trial (CLIN06) evaluated the efficacy of rAAV2/2-ND4 vs. 11 pooled NH studies used as an external control. Subjects: The LHON subjects carried the m.11778G>A ND4 mutation and were aged ≥15 years at onset of vision loss. Methods: A total of 76 subjects received a single intravitreal rAAV2/2-ND4 injection in one eye and sham injection in the fellow eye within 1 year after vision loss in REVERSE and RESCUE. Both eyes were considered as treated due to the rAAV2/2-ND4 treatment efficacy observed in the contralateral eyes. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from REVERSE, RESCUE, and CLIN06 up to 4.3 years after vision loss was compared to the visual acuity of 208 NH subjects matched for age and ND4 genotype. The NH subjects were from a LHON registry (REALITY) and from 10 NH studies. A locally estimated scatterplot smoothing (LOESS), non-parametric, local regression model was used to modelize visual acuity curves over time, and linear mixed model was used for statistical inferences. Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome measure was evolution of visual acuity from 12 months after vision loss, when REVERSE and RESCUE patients had been treated with rAAV2/2-ND4. Results: The LOESS curves showed that the BCVA of the treated patients progressively improved from month 12 to 52 after vision loss. At month 48, there was a statistically and clinically relevant difference in visual acuity of −0.33 logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution (LogMAR) (16.5 ETDRS letters equivalent) in favor of treated eyes vs. NH eyes (p < 0.01). Most treated eyes (88.7%) were on-chart at month 48 as compared to 48.1% of the NH eyes (p < 0.01). The treatment effect at last observation remained statistically and clinically significant when adjusted for age and duration of follow-up (−0.32 LogMAR, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: The m.11778G>A LHON patients treated with rAAV2/2-ND4 exhibited an improvement of visual acuity over more than 4 years after vision loss to a degree not demonstrated in NH studies. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02652767, NCT02652780, NCT03406104, and NCT03295071. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8181419 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81814192021-06-08 Intravitreal Gene Therapy vs. Natural History in Patients With Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Carrying the m.11778G>A ND4 Mutation: Systematic Review and Indirect Comparison Newman, Nancy J. Yu-Wai-Man, Patrick Carelli, Valerio Biousse, Valerie Moster, Mark L. Vignal-Clermont, Catherine Sergott, Robert C. Klopstock, Thomas Sadun, Alfredo A. Girmens, Jean-François La Morgia, Chiara DeBusk, Adam A. Jurkute, Neringa Priglinger, Claudia Karanjia, Rustum Josse, Constant Salzmann, Julie Montestruc, François Roux, Michel Taiel, Magali Sahel, José-Alain Front Neurol Neurology Objective: This work aimed to compare the evolution of visual outcomes in Leber hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON) patients treated with intravitreal gene therapy to the spontaneous evolution in prior natural history (NH) studies. Design: A combined analysis of two phase three randomized, double-masked, sham-controlled studies (REVERSE and RESCUE) and their joint long-term extension trial (CLIN06) evaluated the efficacy of rAAV2/2-ND4 vs. 11 pooled NH studies used as an external control. Subjects: The LHON subjects carried the m.11778G>A ND4 mutation and were aged ≥15 years at onset of vision loss. Methods: A total of 76 subjects received a single intravitreal rAAV2/2-ND4 injection in one eye and sham injection in the fellow eye within 1 year after vision loss in REVERSE and RESCUE. Both eyes were considered as treated due to the rAAV2/2-ND4 treatment efficacy observed in the contralateral eyes. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from REVERSE, RESCUE, and CLIN06 up to 4.3 years after vision loss was compared to the visual acuity of 208 NH subjects matched for age and ND4 genotype. The NH subjects were from a LHON registry (REALITY) and from 10 NH studies. A locally estimated scatterplot smoothing (LOESS), non-parametric, local regression model was used to modelize visual acuity curves over time, and linear mixed model was used for statistical inferences. Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome measure was evolution of visual acuity from 12 months after vision loss, when REVERSE and RESCUE patients had been treated with rAAV2/2-ND4. Results: The LOESS curves showed that the BCVA of the treated patients progressively improved from month 12 to 52 after vision loss. At month 48, there was a statistically and clinically relevant difference in visual acuity of −0.33 logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution (LogMAR) (16.5 ETDRS letters equivalent) in favor of treated eyes vs. NH eyes (p < 0.01). Most treated eyes (88.7%) were on-chart at month 48 as compared to 48.1% of the NH eyes (p < 0.01). The treatment effect at last observation remained statistically and clinically significant when adjusted for age and duration of follow-up (−0.32 LogMAR, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: The m.11778G>A LHON patients treated with rAAV2/2-ND4 exhibited an improvement of visual acuity over more than 4 years after vision loss to a degree not demonstrated in NH studies. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02652767, NCT02652780, NCT03406104, and NCT03295071. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8181419/ /pubmed/34108929 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.662838 Text en Copyright © 2021 Newman, Yu-Wai-Man, Carelli, Biousse, Moster, Vignal-Clermont, Sergott, Klopstock, Sadun, Girmens, La Morgia, DeBusk, Jurkute, Priglinger, Karanjia, Josse, Salzmann, Montestruc, Roux, Taiel and Sahel. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Neurology Newman, Nancy J. Yu-Wai-Man, Patrick Carelli, Valerio Biousse, Valerie Moster, Mark L. Vignal-Clermont, Catherine Sergott, Robert C. Klopstock, Thomas Sadun, Alfredo A. Girmens, Jean-François La Morgia, Chiara DeBusk, Adam A. Jurkute, Neringa Priglinger, Claudia Karanjia, Rustum Josse, Constant Salzmann, Julie Montestruc, François Roux, Michel Taiel, Magali Sahel, José-Alain Intravitreal Gene Therapy vs. Natural History in Patients With Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Carrying the m.11778G>A ND4 Mutation: Systematic Review and Indirect Comparison |
title | Intravitreal Gene Therapy vs. Natural History in Patients With Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Carrying the m.11778G>A ND4 Mutation: Systematic Review and Indirect Comparison |
title_full | Intravitreal Gene Therapy vs. Natural History in Patients With Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Carrying the m.11778G>A ND4 Mutation: Systematic Review and Indirect Comparison |
title_fullStr | Intravitreal Gene Therapy vs. Natural History in Patients With Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Carrying the m.11778G>A ND4 Mutation: Systematic Review and Indirect Comparison |
title_full_unstemmed | Intravitreal Gene Therapy vs. Natural History in Patients With Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Carrying the m.11778G>A ND4 Mutation: Systematic Review and Indirect Comparison |
title_short | Intravitreal Gene Therapy vs. Natural History in Patients With Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Carrying the m.11778G>A ND4 Mutation: Systematic Review and Indirect Comparison |
title_sort | intravitreal gene therapy vs. natural history in patients with leber hereditary optic neuropathy carrying the m.11778g>a nd4 mutation: systematic review and indirect comparison |
topic | Neurology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8181419/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34108929 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.662838 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT newmannancyj intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT yuwaimanpatrick intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT carellivalerio intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT bioussevalerie intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT mostermarkl intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT vignalclermontcatherine intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT sergottrobertc intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT klopstockthomas intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT sadunalfredoa intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT girmensjeanfrancois intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT lamorgiachiara intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT debuskadama intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT jurkuteneringa intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT priglingerclaudia intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT karanjiarustum intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT josseconstant intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT salzmannjulie intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT montestrucfrancois intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT rouxmichel intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT taielmagali intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison AT saheljosealain intravitrealgenetherapyvsnaturalhistoryinpatientswithleberhereditaryopticneuropathycarryingthem11778gand4mutationsystematicreviewandindirectcomparison |