A Systematic Literature Review and Indirect Treatment Comparison of Efficacy of Repository Corticotropin Injection versus Synthetic Adrenocorticotropic Hormone for Infantile Spasms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Infantile spasms is a rare disease characterized by distinct seizures and hypsarrhythmia. Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) is available as a natural product (repository corticotropin injection, [RCI]; Acthar® Gel) and as synthetic analogs. RCI is a naturally-sourced complex mixture of purified ACTH analogs and other pituitary peptides approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration as a monotherapy for the treatment of infantile spasms. RCI is commonly used in the United States. Outside the United States, synthetic analogs of ACTH—synthetic ACTH1-24 (tetracosactide) and synthetic ACTH1-39 (corticotropin carboxymethyl-cellulose [CCMC])—are used. The efficacy of RCI may differ from that of synthetic ACTH treatments based on the structure of peptide; however, no head-to-head clinical trials have compared the efficacy of RCI and synthetic ACTH treatments. Objective: A systematic review and indirect treatment comparison of clinical trials was conducted to assess the comparative efficacy of RCI and synthetic ACTH treatments in infantile spasms. Methods: A search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through September 30, 2020. Relevant clinical trials on RCI or synthetic ACTH therapy and reporting either cessation of spasms or resolution of hypsarrhythmia, separately or as a combined outcome were included. A Bayesian indirect treatment comparison using a fixed-effects model was used for comparative efficacy. Results: Of 473 citations screened, 21 studies were reviewed qualitatively. In the indirect treatment comparison of six eligible clinical trial studies, the odds of achieving efficacy outcomes were five to eight times greater with RCI than with tetracosactide and 14 to 16 times greater than CCMC. This translated to a risk reduction of 10% to 14% and 40% to 50% with RCI versus tetracosactide and CCMC, respectively. For every two to five patients treated, RCI improved efficacy outcomes in one additional patient compared to synthetic ACTH (adjusted number needed-to-treat). Conclusions: Based on the available limited evidence, results suggest RCI may be more efficacious for infantile spasms than synthetic ACTH treatments. Our findings provide a blueprint to inform the design of future prospective studies for the treatment of infantile spasms.
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 | 0.011 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".