MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408224561 · doi:10.1007/s40263-025-01171-x

The Safety Profile of Pridopidine, a Novel Sigma-1 Receptor Agonist for the Treatment of Huntington’s Disease

2025· article· en· W4408224561 on OpenAlexaff
Yigal Paul Goldberg, Leehee Navon-Perry, Andrés Cruz-Herranz, Kelly Chen, Gabriele Hecker-Barth, Katrin Spiegel, Yaël C. Cohen, Martin Niethammer, Andrew M. Tan, Henk Schuring, Michal Geva, Michael R. Hayden

Bibliographic record

VenueCNS Drugs · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPharmacological Receptor Mechanisms and Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuntington's diseasePsychopharmacologyAgonistPharmacologyMedicineNeurologySigma-1 receptorDiseaseSigma receptorPsychiatryReceptorInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Huntington's disease (HD) is a rare, fatal, chronic progressive neurodegenerative disorder with a significant unmet medical need for effective treatments. Pridopidine is a novel, first-in-class, highly selective and potent sigma-1 receptor (S1R) agonist in development for HD. Pridopidine has been extensively studied in adult HD across the full spectrum of disease severity and age ranges, and its safety profile has been characterized in approximately 1600 participants across multiple studies and a broad range of doses. The specific objective of this study was to gain an in-depth understanding of pridopidine's safety profile at the recommended human dose of 45 mg twice daily (bid) in patients with HD. METHODS: An integrated safety analysis of pooled data from 1067 patients with HD enrolled in four double-blind, placebo-controlled studies was performed. The safety profile of pridopidine was compared with placebo. RESULTS: Pridopidine was found to be generally safe and well tolerated with an adverse event (AE) profile comparable to that of placebo. Moreover, there were no significant differences observed in the safety profile of pridopidine compared with placebo when analyzed by age, sex, baseline total functional capacity (TFC), cytosine-adenine-guanine (CAG) repeat length, use of antidopaminergic medications (ADMs), and region. CONCLUSIONS: The integrated analysis replicated and corroborated the good safety profile observed in the individual studies. Despite the larger sample size, no new safety signals emerged. Long-term exposure to pridopidine, up to 6.5 years in open-label extension studies, revealed no new safety concerns, supporting its potential for long-term use in patients with HD.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCNS DrugsSame topicPharmacological Receptor Mechanisms and EffectsFrench-language works237,207