Pridopidine treatment in ALS: subgroup analyses from the HEALEY ALS Platform trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease with limited treatment options. Pridopidine, a selective sigma-1 receptor agonist, was evaluated in Regimen D of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial. Although the primary endpoint (ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) total score accounting for survival at 24 weeks) was not met, a predefined subgroup analysis suggested slowed disease progression in ALS patients with definite and early disease (<18 months from onset). This report presents an exploratory analysis that further investigates pridopidine in rapidly progressing participants with definite/probable ALS and early-disease, where treatment effects may be more pronounced. Methods: The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial assigned participants to pridopidine 45 mg bid or placebo, and placebo patients were shared across four trial regimens. The primary outcome was ALSFRS-R total score, with secondary outcomes assessing respiratory, bulbar, and speech functions. Results: Of 163 participants randomized to Regimen D, 72 met subgroup criteria (pridopidine: n = 37; shared placebo: n = 35). At week 24, pridopidine slowed ALSFRS-R total score decline (32%; Δ2.90, p = 0.03) and slowed decline of ALSFRS-R respiratory function (62%; Δ1.20, p = 0.03) and dyspnea (88%; Δ0.85, p = 0.005). ALSFRS-R-Bulbar function stabilized, with articulation and speaking rate declines reduced by 93% (Δ0.43, p = 0.0007) and 70% (Δ0.43, p = 0.002), respectively. Pridopidine was well-tolerated, with a safety profile comparable to placebo. All p values are nominal. Conclusion: Post hoc subgroup analysis suggests therapeutic benefits of pridopidine in patients that had definite/probable ALS and with early-disease progression, supporting further evaluation in a Phase 3 trial.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".