Efficacy and Safety of Intravitreal Gene Therapy for Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Treated within 6 Months of Disease Onset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of a single intravitreal injection of rAAV2/2-ND4 in subjects with visual loss from Leber hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON). DESIGN: RESCUE is a multicenter, randomized, double-masked, sham-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects with the m.11778G>A mitochondrial DNA mutation and vision loss ≤6 months from onset in 1 or both eyes were included. METHODS: viral genomes in 90 μl) or to sham injection. The left eye received the treatment not allocated to the right eye. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was the difference of the change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between rAAV2/2-ND4-treated and sham-treated eyes at week 48. Other outcome measures included contrast sensitivity, Humphrey visual field perimetry, retinal anatomic measures, and quality of life. Follow-up extended to week 96. RESULTS: Efficacy analysis included 38 subjects. Mean age was 36.8 years, and 82% were male. Mean duration of vision loss at time of treatment was 3.6 months and 3.9 months in the rAAV2/2-ND4-treated eyes and sham-treated eyes, respectively. Mean baseline logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) BCVA (standard deviation) was 1.31 (0.52) in rAAV2/2-ND4-treated eyes and 1.26 (0.62) in sham-treated eyes, with a range from -0.20 to 2.51. At week 48, the difference of the change in BCVA from baseline between rAAV2/2-ND4-treated and sham-treated eyes was -0.01 logMAR (P = 0.89); the primary end point of a -0.3 logMAR (15-letter) difference was not met. The mean BCVA for both groups deteriorated over the initial weeks, reaching the worst levels at week 24, followed by a plateau phase until week 48, and then an improvement of +10 and +9 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters equivalent from the plateau level in the rAAV2/2-ND4-treated and sham-treated eyes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At 96 weeks after unilateral injection of rAAV2/2-ND4, LHON subjects carrying the m.11778G>A mutation treated within 6 months after vision loss achieved comparable visual outcomes in the injected and uninjected eyes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".