Stride Velocity 95th Centile Detects Decline in Ambulatory Function Over Shorter Intervals than the 6-Minute Walk Test or North Star Ambulatory Assessment in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.

Background: Stride Velocity 95th Centile (SV95C) is the first wearable device-derived clinical outcome assessment (COA) to receive European Medicines Agency (EMA) qualification as a primary endpoint in ambulant patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) aged ≥4 years. Objective: To compare SV95C-in its first-ever clinical trial application as a secondary endpoint-with established motor function COAs used in the trial (Four-Stair Climb [4SC] velocity, North Star Ambulatory Assessment [NSAA], and Six-Minute Walk Distance [6MWD]). Methods: SV95C was a secondary endpoint in a subset (n = 47) of participants in the SPITFIRE/WN40227 trial of taldefgrobep alfa, which was discontinued due to lack of clinical benefit. Participants in the ≤48-week SV95C sub-study were 6-11 years old and received corticosteroids for ≥6 months pre-treatment. Pearson correlations were used to compare SV95C with the other COAs. Responsiveness and changes over time were respectively assessed via standardized response means (SRMs) based on absolute changes and mixed models for repeated measures. Results: SV95C change at Week 24 was -0.07 m/s, with limited variability (standard deviation: 0.16, n = 27). The SRM for SV95C indicated moderate responsiveness to clinical change at the earliest timepoint (Week 12, n = 46), while those of the other COAs did not indicate moderate responsiveness until Week 36 (6MWD, n = 33) or Week 48 (4SC velocity, n = 20; NSAA total score, n = 20). Baseline correlations between SV95C and other COAs were strong (r = 0.611-0.695). Correlations between SV95C change from baseline to Week 48 and changes in other COAs were moderate to strong (r = 0.443-0.678).∥. Conclusions: Overall, SV95C demonstrated sensitivity to ambulatory decline over short intervals, low variability, and correlation with established COAs. Although the negative trial precluded demonstration of SV95C's sensitivity to drug effect, these findings support the continued use of SV95C in DMD clinical trials.

Effect of sirolimus on muscle in inclusion body myositis observed with magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Finding sensitive clinical outcome measures has become crucial in natural history studies and therapeutic trials of neuromuscular disorders. Here, we focus on 1-year longitudinal data from quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and phosphorus magnetic resonance spectroscopy (31P MRS) in a placebo-controlled study of sirolimus for inclusion body myositis (IBM), also examining their links to functional, strength, and clinical parameters in lower limb muscles. METHODS: Quantitative MRI and 31P MRS data were collected at 3 T from a single site, involving 44 patients (22 on placebo, 22 on sirolimus) at baseline and year-1, and 21 healthy controls. Assessments included fat fraction (FF), contractile cross-sectional area (cCSA), and water T2 in global leg and thigh segments, muscle groups, individual muscles, as well as 31P MRS indices in quadriceps or triceps surae. Analyses covered patient-control comparisons, annual change assessments via standard t-tests and linear mixed models, calculation of standardized response means (SRM), and exploration of correlations between MRI, 31P MRS, functional, strength, and clinical parameters. RESULTS: The quadriceps and gastrocnemius medialis muscles had the highest FF values, displaying notable heterogeneity and asymmetry, particularly in the quadriceps. In the placebo group, the median 1-year FF increase in the quadriceps was 3.2% (P < 0.001), whereas in the sirolimus group, it was 0.7% (P = 0.033). Both groups experienced a significant decrease in cCSA in the quadriceps after 1 year (P < 0.001), with median changes of 12.6% for the placebo group and 5.5% for the sirolimus group. Differences in FF and cCSA changes between the two groups were significant (P < 0.001). SRM values for FF and cCSA were 1.3 and 1.4 in the placebo group and 0.5 and 0.8 in the sirolimus group, respectively. Water T2 values were highest in the quadriceps muscles of both groups, significantly exceeding control values in both groups (P < 0.001) and were higher in the placebo group than in the sirolimus group. After treatment, water T2 increased significantly only in the sirolimus group's quadriceps (P < 0.01). Multiple 31P MRS indices were abnormal in patients compared to controls and remained unchanged after treatment. Significant correlations were identified between baseline water T2 and FF at baseline and the change in FF (P < 0.001). Additionally, significant correlations were observed between FF, cCSA, water T2, and functional and strength outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated that quantitative MRI/31P MRS can discern measurable differences between placebo and sirolimus-treated IBM patients, offering promise for future therapeutic trials in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies such as IBM.

Sirolimus for treatment of patients with inclusion body myositis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept, phase 2b trial.

BACKGROUND: Inclusion body myositis is the most frequent myositis in patients older than 50 years. Classical immunosuppressants are ineffective in treating inclusion body myositis, and to date there are no recommendations for pharmacological approaches to treatment. When used after organ transplantation, sirolimus can block the proliferation of effector T cells, while preserving T regulatory cells, and induce autophagy, all of which are processes that are impaired in inclusion body myositis. In this pilot study, we aimed to test the efficacy of sirolimus in patients with inclusion body myositis. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept, phase 2b trial was done at a single hospital in Paris, France. The study included men and women (aged 45-80 years) who had a defined diagnosis of inclusion body myositis according to established criteria. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive once-daily oral sirolimus 2 mg or placebo. Centralised balanced block randomisation (blocks of four) was computer generated without stratification. The study comprised a 15-day screening period (days -15 to 0) and a 52-week treatment period (day 0 to month 12). The primary endpoint was the relative percentage change from baseline to month 12 in maximal voluntary isometric knee extension strength. Secondary endpoints included the following assessments at months 6 and 12: 6-min walking distance, isometric muscle strength for hand grip (finger flexors), knee flexion and elbow flexion and extension, forced vital capacity, muscle replacement with fat measured by quantitative nuclear MRI, Inclusion Body Myositis Weakness Composite Index (IBMWCI), Inclusion Body Myositis Functional Rating Scale (IBMFRS), Health Assessment Questionnaire without Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and analyses of T-cell subpopulations by mass cytometry. The primary analysis was done on the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02481453. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2015, and May 13, 2016, we screened 285 patients, 44 of whom were randomly allocated to sirolimus (22 patients) or placebo (22 patients). We observed no difference in the primary outcome of relative percentage change from baseline to month 12 of the maximal voluntary isometric knee extension strength (median difference 3·78, 95% CI -10·61 to 17·31; p=0·85). For secondary outcomes, differences between the groups were not significant for changes in strength of other muscle groups (grip, elbow flexion and extension, or knee flexion), IBMWCI, IBMFRS, and lower limb muscle fat fraction. However, we observed significant differences in favour of sirolimus between the study groups for HAQ-DI, forced vital capacity, thigh fat fraction, and 6-min walking distance. Ten (45%) of 22 patients in the sirolimus group had a serious adverse event compared with six (27%) of 22 patients in the placebo group. Four (18%) patients in the sirolimus group stopped their treatment because of adverse events (severe mouth ulcers, aseptic pneumonia, renal insufficiency, and peripheral lower limb oedema), which resolved after treatment discontinuation. Canker sores were the most frequent side-effect and were mainly mild or moderate in ten patients. INTERPRETATION: We found no evidence for efficacy of sirolimus for treating inclusion body myositis based on maximal voluntary isometric knee extension strength and other muscle strength measures, and the side-effects of treatment were substantial for some patients. However, we believe there was enough evidence of benefit in certain secondary outcomes to pursue a multicentre phase 3 trial to further assess the safety and efficacy of sirolimus. FUNDING: Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale, Direction générale de l'offre de soins, and Association Française contre les Myopathies.