Five-Year Outcomes of Lenadogene Nolparvovec Gene Therapy in Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Limited studies have assessed the long-term benefit/risk of gene therapy for Leber hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON). Objective: To determine the safety and efficacy of lenadogene nolparvovec in patients with LHON due to the MT-ND4 gene variant for up to 5 years after administration. Design, Setting, and Participants: The RESCUE and REVERSE Long-Term Follow-up Study (RESTORE), conducted from 2018 to 2022, is the 5-year follow-up study of the 2 phase 3 clinical studies RESCUE (Efficacy Study of Lenadogene Nolparvovec for the Treatment of Vision Loss Up to 6 Months From Onset in LHON Due to the MT-ND4 Mutation) and REVERSE (Efficacy Study of Lenadogene Nolparvovec for the Treatment of Vision Loss From 7 Months to 1 Year From Onset in LHON Due to the MT-ND4 Mutation). At the end of each study, ie, 2 years after gene therapy administration, patients were offered enrollment in the RESTORE trial, a multinational, multicenter, prospective study, for an additional 3 years of follow-up. Patients with LHON due to the MT-ND4 gene variant received lenadogene nolparvovec in 1 eye and a sham injection in the other eye. Intervention: Lenadogene nolparvovec was administered as a single intravitreal injection in the RESCUE/REVERSE studies. Main Outcomes and Measures: Measures included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), quality of life using the National Eye Institute visual functioning questionnaire 25 (NEI VFQ-25), and adverse events. Results: Among the 76 patients who received gene therapy in the RESCUE (n = 39) and REVERSE (n = 37) studies, 72 (94.7%) completed these studies; 62 patients (81.6%) participated in the RESTORE trial, and 55 patients (72.4%) completed the 5-year follow-up. Participants were mostly male (49 [79.0%]) with a mean (SD) age of 35.9 (15.3) years at treatment. At baseline, the mean (SD) BCVA was 1.5 (0.5) logMAR (20/600 Snellen) in eyes to be treated with lenadogene nolparvovec and 1.4 (0.5) logMAR (20/500) in sham eyes. At the end of the RESCUE/REVERSE trials, ie, 2 years after treatment, eyes treated with lenadogene nolparvovec and eyes treated with sham reached a mean BCVA value of 1.4 (0.6) logMAR (20/500). The mean (SD) change from baseline to year 2 was -0.05 (0.6) logMAR (+1 line) and 0.01 (0.6) logMAR (-0 line) in gene therapy-treated and sham eyes, respectively (difference, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.16 to 0.09; P = .60). Five years after treatment, the bilateral improvement from nadir was similar to that observed at 2 years, with a mean (SD) change in BCVA of -0.4 (0.5) logMAR (more than +4 lines) for eyes treated with lenadogene nolparvovec and -0.4 (0.4) logMAR (+4 lines) for eyes treated with sham (difference, -0.05; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.04; P = .27). An improvement of at least -0.3 logMAR (+3 lines) from the nadir in at least 1 eye was observed in 66.1% of participants (41 of 62). Between 2 and 5 years, intraocular inflammation was noted in 4 participants with 8 events in eyes treated with lenadogene nolparvovec and 1 event in an eye treated with sham. Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis of the RESTORE trial, follow-up of patients with LHON due to the MT-ND4 gene variant unilaterally treated with lenadogene nolparvovec demonstrated a sustained bilateral improvement in BCVA and a good safety profile up to 5 years after treatment. This evidence of persistent benefit over time is promising for the use of gene therapy in these patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03406104.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».