A Phase I/IIa Clinical Trial of a Recombinant Rho Protein Antagonist in Acute Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple lines of evidence have validated the Rho pathway as important in controlling the neuronal response to growth inhibitory proteins after central nervous system (CNS) injury. A drug called BA-210 (trademarked as Cethrin(®)) blocks activation of Rho and has shown promise in pre-clinical animal studies in being used to treat spinal cord injury (SCI). This is a report of a Phase I/IIa clinical study designed to test the safety and tolerability of the drug, and the neurological status of patients following the administration of a single dose of BA-210 applied during surgery following acute SCI. Patients with thoracic (T2-T12) or cervical (C4-T1) SCI were sequentially recruited for this dose-ranging (0.3 mg to 9 mg Cethrin), multi-center study of 48 patients with complete American Spinal Injury Association assessment (ASIA) A. Vital signs; clinical laboratory tests; computed tomography (CT) scans of the spine, head, and abdomen; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine, and ASIA assessment were performed in the pre-study period and in follow-up periods out to 1 year after treatment. The treatment-emergent adverse events that were reported were typical for a population of acute SCI patients, and no serious adverse events were attributed to the drug. The pharmacokinetic analysis showed low levels of systemic exposure to the drug, and there was high inter-patient variability. Changes in ASIA motor scores from baseline were low across all dose groups in thoracic patients (1.8±5.1) and larger in cervical patients (18.6±19.3). The largest change in motor score was observed in the cervical patients treated with 3 mg of Cethrin in whom a 27.3±13.3 point improvement in ASIA motor score at 12 months was observed. Approximately 6% of thoracic patients converted from ASIA A to ASIA C or D compared to 31% of cervical patients and 66% for the 3-mg cervical cohort. Although the patient numbers are small, the observed motor recovery in this open-label trial suggests that BA-210 may increase neurological recovery after complete SCI. Further clinical trials with Cethrin in SCI patients are planned, to establish evidence of efficacy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".