Novel approaches to analysis of the North Star Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA) in Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD): Observations from a phase 2 trial.

INTRODUCTION: The North Star Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA) tool is a key instrument for measuring clinical outcomes in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). To gain a better understanding of the longitudinal utility of the NSAA, we evaluated NSAA data from a phase II trial of 120 patients with DMD treated with domagrozumab or placebo. METHODS: The NSAA exploratory analyses included assessment of individual skills gained/lost, total skills gained/lost, cumulative loss of function, and the impact of transient loss of function due to a temporary disability on NSAA total score (temporary zero score). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the total number of NSAA skills gained (mean 1.41 and 1.04, respectively; p = 0.3314) or lost (3.90 vs. 5.0; p = 0.0998) between domagrozumab- vs. placebo-treated patients at week 49. However, domagrozumab-treated patients were less likely to lose the ability to perform a NSAA item (hazard ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.98, p = 0.029) over 48-weeks vs. placebo-treated patients. When temporary zero scores were changed to "not obtainable" (8 values from 7 patients), domagrozumab-treated patients scored higher on the NSAA total score versus placebo-treated patients (difference at week 49: 2.0, 95% CI: 0.1-3.9, p = 0.0359). CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory analyses reveal additional approaches to interpreting the NSAA data beyond just change in NSAA total score. These observations also highlight the importance of reporting items as "not obtainable" for a patient with a temporary/transient physical disability that impacts their ability to perform the NSAA test. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02310763.

High throughput screening for expanded CTG repeats in myotonic dystrophy type 1 using melt curve analysis.

BACKGROUND: Myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) is caused by CTG repeat expansions in the DMPK gene and is the most common form of muscular dystrophy. Patients can have long delays from onset to diagnosis, since clinical signs and symptoms are often nonspecific and overlapping with other disorders. Clinical genetic testing by Southern blot or triplet-primed PCR (TP-PCR) is technically challenging and cost prohibitive for population surveys. METHODS: Here, we present a high throughput, low-cost screening tool for CTG repeat expansions using TP-PCR followed by high resolution melt curve analysis with saturating concentrations of SYBR GreenER dye. RESULTS: We determined that multimodal melt profiles from the TP-PCR assay are a proxy for amplicon length stoichiometry. In a screen of 10,097 newborn blood spots, melt profile analysis accurately reflected the tri-modal distribution of common alleles from 5 to 35 CTG repeats, and identified the premutation and full expansion alleles. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that robust detection of expanded CTG repeats in a single tube can be achieved from samples derived from specimens with minimal template DNA such as dried blood spots (DBS). This technique is readily adaptable to large-scale testing programs such as population studies and newborn screening programs.

Cost-Effectiveness of Nusinersen and Universal Newborn Screening for Spinal Muscular Atrophy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nusinersen with and without universal newborn screening for infantile-onset spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). STUDY DESIGN: A Markov model using data from clinical trials with US epidemiologic and cost data was developed. The primary interventions studied were nusinersen treatment in a screening setting, nusinersen treatment in a nonscreening setting, and standard care. Analysis was conducted from a societal perspective. RESULTS: Compared with no screening and no treatment, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for nusinersen with screening was $330 558 per event-free life year (LY) saved, whereas the ICER for nusinersen treatment without screening was $508 481 per event-free LY saved. For nusinersen with screening to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50 000 per event-free LY saved, the price would need to be $23 361 per dose, less than one-fifth its current price of $125 000. Preliminary data from the NURTURE trial indicated an 85.7% improvement in expected LYs saved compared with our base results. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, nusinersen and screening was a preferred strategy 93% of the time at a $500 000 WTP threshold. CONCLUSION: Universal newborn screening for SMA provides improved economic value for payers and patients when nusinersen is available.

A checklist for clinical trials in rare disease: obstacles and anticipatory actions-lessons learned from the FOR-DMD trial.

BACKGROUND: Trials in rare diseases have many challenges, among which are the need to set up multiple sites in different countries to achieve recruitment targets and the divergent landscape of clinical trial regulations in those countries. Over the past years, there have been initiatives to facilitate the process of international study set-up, but the fruits of these deliberations require time to be operationally in place. FOR-DMD (Finding the Optimum Steroid Regimen for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) is an academic-led clinical trial which aims to find the optimum steroid regimen for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for 5 years (July 2010 to June 2015), anticipating that all sites (40 across the USA, Canada, the UK, Germany and Italy) would be open to recruitment from July 2011. However, study start-up was significantly delayed and recruitment did not start until January 2013. METHOD: The FOR-DMD study is used as an example to identify systematic problems in the set-up of international, multi-centre clinical trials. The full timeline of the FOR-DMD study, from funding approval to site activation, was collated and reviewed. Systematic issues were identified and grouped into (1) study set-up, e.g. drug procurement; (2) country set-up, e.g. competent authority applications; and (3) site set-up, e.g. contracts, to identify the main causes of delay and suggest areas where anticipatory action could overcome these obstacles in future studies. RESULTS: Time from the first contact to site activation across countries ranged from 6 to 24 months. Reasons of delay were universal (sponsor agreement, drug procurement, budgetary constraints), country specific (complexity and diversity of regulatory processes, indemnity requirements) and site specific (contracting and approvals). The main identified obstacles included (1) issues related to drug supply, (2) NIH requirements regarding contracting with non-US sites, (3) differing regulatory requirements in the five participating countries, (4) lack of national harmonisation with contracting and the requirement to negotiate terms and contract individually with each site and (5) diversity of languages needed for study materials. Additionally, as with many academic-led studies, the FOR-DMD study did not have access to the infrastructure and expertise that a contracted research organisation could provide, organisations often employed in pharmaceutical-sponsored studies. This delay impacted recruitment, challenged the clinical relevance of the study outcomes and potentially delayed the delivery of the best treatment to patients. CONCLUSION: Based on the FOR-DMD experience, and as an interim solution, we have devised a checklist of steps to not only anticipate and minimise delays in academic international trial initiation but also identify obstacles that will require a concerted effort on the part of many stakeholders to mitigate.