The Muscular Dystrophy Association's neuroMuscular ObserVational Research Data Hub (MOVR): Design, Methods, and Initial Observations.

BACKGROUND: Neuromuscular disease (NMD) research is experiencing tremendous growth as a result of progress in diagnostics and therapeutics yet there continues to be a significant clinical data shortage for these rare diseases. To maximize the development and impact of new therapies, the Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA) created the neuroMuscular ObserVational Research Data Hub (MOVR) as an observational research study that collects disease-specific measures from individuals living with NMDs in the United States. OBJECTIVE: This manuscript provides a description of MOVR, participants enrolled in MOVR, and longitudinal data availability. METHODS: MOVR collects longitudinal data from individuals diagnosed with ALS, BMD, DMD, FSHD, LGMD, Pompe disease, or SMA, and who are seen for care at a participating MDA Care Center. Data are entered from medical records into standardized electronic case report forms (eCRFs). These eCRFs capture participants' demographics, diagnostic journeys, clinical visits, and discontinuation from the study. RESULTS: From January 2019 to May 2022, MOVR collected data from 50 participating care centers and 1,957 participants. Data from 1,923 participants who participated in MDA's pilot registry were migrated into MOVR, creating a total of 3,880 participants in MOVR. Initial analysis of aggregated data demonstrated that 91% of eCRFs were complete. Forty-three percent of participants had 3 or more encounters and 50% of all encounters were 5 months or less from the previous encounter. DISCUSSION: As a centralized data hub for multiple NMDs, MOVR serves as a platform that can be used to inform disease understanding, guide clinical trial design, and accelerate drug development for NMDs.

Meeting Report: 2022 Muscular Dystrophy Association Summit on 'Safety and Challenges in Gene Transfer Therapy'.

Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA) has invested over $125M in the development of gene therapy for neuromuscular disorders (NMD) over the past 20 years. As a lead initiator of progress in this important field of medicine and to help ensure continued progress towards therapies for patients, MDA organized a dedicated summit in January 2022 to address emerging challenges in safely delivering adeno-associated virus (AAV) mediated gene therapies with a focus on their application in NMD. In this meeting, chaired by Carsten Bönnemann (NINDS, NIH) and Barry Byrne (University of Florida), academic and industry experts and stakeholders convened to openly discuss adverse events linked to clinical trials, as well as other challenges emerging in preclinical studies associated with difficulties in the translation of AAV-mediated gene therapies.

Gene therapy as a potential therapeutic option for Duchenne muscular dystrophy: A qualitative preference study of patients and parents.

OBJECTIVES: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a rare neuromuscular disorder that causes progressive weakness and early death. Gene therapy is an area of new therapeutic development. This qualitative study explored factors influencing parents' and adult patients' preferences about gene therapy. METHODS: We report qualitative data from 17 parents of children with DMD and 6 adult patients. Participants responded to a hypothetical gene therapy vignette with features including non-curative stabilizing benefits to muscle, cardiac and pulmonary function; a treatment-related risk of death; and one-time dosing with time-limited benefit of 8-10 years. We used NVivo 11 to code responses and conduct thematic analyses. RESULTS: All participants placed high value on benefits to skeletal muscle, cardiac, and pulmonary functioning, with the relative importance of cardiac and pulmonary function increasing with disease progression. More than half tolerated a hypothetical 1% risk of death when balanced against Duchenne progression and limited treatment options. Risk tolerance increased at later stages. Participants perceived a 'right time' to initiate gene therapy. Most preferred to wait until a highly-valued function was about to be lost. CONCLUSION: Participants demonstrated a complex weighing of potential benefits against harms and the inevitable decline of untreated Duchenne. Disease progression increased risk tolerance as participants perceived fewer treatment options and placed greater value on maintaining remaining function. In the context of a one-time treatment like gene therapy, our finding that preferences about timing of initiation are influenced by disease state suggest the importance of assessing 'lifetime' preferences across the full spectrum of disease progression.

The Rules of Engagement: CTTI Recommendations for Successful Collaborations Between Sponsors and Patient Groups Around Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the elements necessary for successful collaboration between patient groups and academic and industry sponsors of clinical trials, in order to develop recommendations for best practices for effective patient group engagement. METHODS: In-depth interviews, informed by a previously reported survey, were conducted to identify the fundamentals of successful patient group engagement. Thirty-two respondents from 3 sectors participated: patient groups, academic researchers, and industry. The findings were presented to a multistakeholder group of experts in January 2015. The expert group came to consensus on a set of actionable recommendations for best practices for patient groups and research sponsors. RESULTS: Interview respondents acknowledged that not all patient groups are created equal in terms of what they can contribute to a clinical trial. The most important elements for effective patient group engagement include establishing meaningful partnerships, demonstrating mutual benefits, and collaborating as partners from the planning stage forward. Although there is a growing appreciation by sponsors about the benefits of patient group engagement, there remains some resistance and some uncertainty about how best to engage. Barriers include mismatched expectations and a perception that patient groups lack scientific sophistication and that "wishful thinking" may cloud their recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Patient groups are developing diverse skillsets and acquiring assets to leverage in order to become collaborators with industry and academia on clinical trials. Growing numbers of research sponsors across the clinical trials enterprise are recognizing the benefits of continuous and meaningful patient group engagement, but there are still mindsets to change, and stakeholders need further guidance on operationalizing a new model of clinical trial conduct.

Assessing the Financial Value of Patient Engagement: A Quantitative Approach from CTTI's Patient Groups and Clinical Trials Project.

BACKGROUND: While patient groups, regulators, and sponsors are increasingly considering engaging with patients in the design and conduct of clinical development programs, sponsors are often reluctant to go beyond pilot programs because of uncertainty in the return on investment. We developed an approach to estimate the financial value of patient engagement. METHODS: Expected net present value (ENPV) is a common technique that integrates the key business drivers of cost, time, revenue, and risk into a summary metric for project strategy and portfolio decisions. We assessed the impact of patient engagement on ENPV for a typical oncology development program entering phase 2 or phase 3. RESULTS: For a pre-phase 2 project, the cumulative impact of a patient engagement activity that avoids one protocol amendment and improves enrollment, adherence, and retention is an increase in net present value (NPV) of $62MM ($65MM for pre-phase 3) and an increase in ENPV of $35MM ($75MM for pre-phase 3). Compared with an investment of $100,000 in patient engagement, the NPV and ENPV increases can exceed 500-fold the investment. This ENPV increase is the equivalent of accelerating a pre-phase 2 product launch by 2½ years (1½ years for pre-phase 3). CONCLUSIONS: Risk-adjusted financial models can assess the impact of patient engagement. A combination of empirical data and subjective parameter estimates shows that engagement activities with the potential to avoid protocol amendments and/or improve enrollment, adherence, and retention may add considerable financial value. This approach can help sponsors assess patient engagement investment decisions.

Patient-Centered Therapy Development for Myotonic Dystrophy: Report of the Myotonic Dystrophy Foundation-Sponsored Workshop.

Myotonic dystrophy (DM) is an autosomal dominant, repeat expansion, progressive disorder with no drug therapies. Consequently, to better define a regulatory pathway in anticipation of new treatment strategies under investigation, the Myotonic Dystrophy Foundation convened a workshop entitled "Patient-Centered Therapy Development for Myotonic Dystrophy" in September 2015. Participants included representatives from academia, industry, the patient community, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Presenters described the symptom burden of the disease, and existing data on DM biomarkers, endpoints, natural history, and benefit-risk considerations. FDA participants helped clarify the regulatory requirements for new drug treatment approvals and DM-specific issues such as variability, slow progression, and low prevalence. Workshop attendees gained a better understanding of DM and the current status of existing data and tools to support therapeutic drug research and development.

Patient Engagement Practices in Clinical Research among Patient Groups, Industry, and Academia in the United States: A Survey.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-centered clinical trial design and execution is becoming increasingly important. No best practice guidelines exist despite a key stakeholder declaration to create more effective engagement models. This study aims to gain a better understanding of attitudes and practices for engaging patient groups so that actionable recommendations may be developed. METHODS: Individuals from industry, academic institutions, and patient groups were identified through Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative and Drug Information Association rosters and mailing lists. Objectives, practices, and perceived barriers related to engaging patient groups in the planning, conduct, and interpretation of clinical trials were reported in an online survey. Descriptive and inferential statistical analysis of survey data followed a literature review to inform survey questions. RESULTS: Survey respondents (n = 179) valued the importance of involving patient groups in research; however, patient group respondents valued their contributions to research protocol development, funding acquisition, and interpretation of study results more highly than those contributions were valued by industry and academic respondents (all p < .001). Patient group respondents placed higher value in open communications, clear expectations, and detailed contract execution than did non-patient group respondents (all p < .05). Industry and academic respondents more often cited internal bureaucratic processes and reluctance to share information as engagement barriers than did patient group respondents (all p < .01). Patient groups reported that a lack of transparency and understanding of the benefits of collaboration on the part of industry and academia were greater barriers than did non-patient group respondents (all p< .01). CONCLUSIONS: Despite reported similarities among approaches to engagement by the three stakeholder groups, key differences exist in perceived barriers and benefits to partnering with patient groups among the sectors studied. This recognition could inform the development of best practices for patient-centered clinical trial design and execution. Additional research is needed to define and optimize key success factors.

The TREAT-NMD advisory committee for therapeutics (TACT): an innovative de-risking model to foster orphan drug development.

Despite multiple publications on potential therapies for neuromuscular diseases (NMD) in cell and animal models only a handful reach clinical trials. The ability to prioritise drug development according to objective criteria is particularly critical in rare diseases with large unmet needs and a limited numbers of patients who can be enrolled into clinical trials. TREAT-NMD Advisory Committee for Therapeutics (TACT) was established to provide independent and objective guidance on the preclinical and development pathway of potential therapies (whether novel or repurposed) for NMD.We present our experience in the establishment and operation of the TACT. TACT provides a unique resource of recognized experts from multiple disciplines. The goal of each TACT review is to help the sponsor to position the candidate compound along a realistic and well-informed plan to clinical trials, and eventual registration. The reviews and subsequent recommendations are focused on generating meaningful and rigorous data that can enable clear go/no-go decisions and facilitate longer term funding or partnering opportunities. The review process thereby acts to comment on viability, de-risking the process of proceeding on a development programme.To date TACT has held 10 review meeting and reviewed 29 program applications in several rare neuromuscular diseases: Of the 29 programs reviewed, 19 were from industry and 10 were from academia; 15 were for novel compounds and 14 were for repurposed drugs; 16 were small molecules and 13 were biologics; 14 were preclinical stage applications and 15 were clinical stage applications. 3 had received Orphan drug designation from European Medicines Agency and 3 from Food and Drug Administration. A number of recurrent themes emerged over the course of the reviews and we found that applicants frequently require advice and education on issues concerned with preclinical standard operating procedures, interactions with regulatory agencies, formulation, repurposing, clinical trial design, manufacturing and ethics.Over the 5 years since its establishment TACT has amassed a body of experience that can be extrapolated to other groups of rare diseases to improve the community's chances of successfully bringing new rare disease drugs to registration and ultimately to market.

A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research.

The US National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke convened major stakeholders in June 2012 to discuss how to improve the methodological reporting of animal studies in grant applications and publications. The main workshop recommendation is that at a minimum studies should report on sample-size estimation, whether and how animals were randomized, whether investigators were blind to the treatment, and the handling of data. We recognize that achieving a meaningful improvement in the quality of reporting will require a concerted effort by investigators, reviewers, funding agencies and journal editors. Requiring better reporting of animal studies will raise awareness of the importance of rigorous study design to accelerate scientific progress.

Whole-genome analysis of sporadic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 90% of persons with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) have the sporadic form, which may be caused by the interaction of multiple environmental factors and previously unknown genes. METHODS: We performed a genomewide association analysis using 766,955 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) found in 386 white patients with sporadic ALS and 542 neurologically normal white controls (the discovery series). Associations of SNPs with sporadic ALS were confirmed in two independent replication populations: replication series 1, with 766 case patients with the disease and 750 neurologically normal controls, and replication series 2, with 135 case patients and 275 controls. RESULTS: We identified 10 genetic loci that are significantly associated (P<0.05) with sporadic ALS in three independent series of case patients and controls and an additional 41 loci that had significant associations in two of the three series. The most significant association with disease in white case patients as compared with controls was found for a SNP near an uncharacterized gene known as FLJ10986 (P=3.0x10(-4); odds ratio for having the genotype in patients vs. controls, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.13 to 1.62). The FLJ10986 protein was found to be expressed in the spinal cord and cerebrospinal fluid of patients and of controls. Specific SNPs seem to be associated with sex, age at onset, and site of onset of sporadic ALS. CONCLUSIONS: Variants of FLJ10986 may confer susceptibility to sporadic ALS. FLJ10986 and 50 other candidate loci warrant further investigation for their potential role in conferring susceptibility to the disease.

Challenges in drug development for muscle disease: a stakeholders' meeting.

Current treatment benefits for patients with muscle disease are limited, but progress in legislative and scientific initiatives have set the stage for the development of new therapies. The MD-CARE Act (Public Law 107-84), which allocates federal resources to muscular dystrophy, was approved by Congress and signed into law by the President of the United States in 2001. This has shifted the emphasis toward translational research. To facilitate a push toward therapy for muscle disorders, the Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA) sponsored a meeting with representatives from industry, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and other government agencies and academia. Each contributed in different ways. The FDA helped define the necessary data to support investigational new drug (IND) applications including the design of proof-of-principle studies, outcome measures for clinical trials, and the pathway for developing surrogate measures for fast-tracking promising new drugs. The NIH, other government agencies, and the MDA described potential funding sources for translational research. Industry delineated a complementary role with academia, and academic investigators elucidated the current strengths and weaknesses of available clinical endpoints. The meeting provided a format for communication for diverse disciplines that usually have no common meeting ground, helping to lay the foundation for bringing products to market in a timely fashion.