Search

Ezutromid (SMT C1100) is a small-molecule utrophin modulator that was developed to treat Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). Previous clinical trials of this agent revealed lower exposure in DMD patients compared with healthy volunteers, which may reflect differences in diet. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of ezutromid in patients with DMD who followed a balanced diet. This was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, ascending single and multiple oral dose study. Twelve pediatric patients were randomly allocated to 1 of 3 treatment sequences within which were 3 treatment periods of 2 weeks each. Each patient received, in a dose-escalating fashion, 1250 mg and 2500 mg twice daily (BID) of ezutromid administered orally as a microfluidized suspension (F3) with placebo in the other treatment period. Throughout the study, patients followed a balanced diet including recommended proportions of major food groups and administration of drug accompanied with 100 mL of full-fat milk. This approach improved the absorption of ezutromid, resulting in higher systemic exposure, with considerable variability in exposure between patients at each dose level. Single and multiple oral doses of 1250 mg and 2500 mg BID were considered safe and well tolerated. No severe or serious adverse events and no study discontinuations due to adverse events were reported. This study provides assurance that, with the formulation tested (F3) and instructions regarding food (balanced diet and whole-fat milk), 2500 mg BID of ezutromid achieves plasma concentrations that, based on preclinical studies, should be able to modulate utrophin expression in future clinical trials.

Knowledge of health related quality of life (HRQOL) in the immediate phase following DMD diagnosis has not been well-characterized. It is important to understand HRQOL early in disease for both clinical care and studies of treatment. The relationship between parent-proxy and child self-report HRQOL and their associations with medical, psycho-social and behavioral symptoms deserve study. In this study HRQOL was measured using the PedsQL inventory in parent/caregiver and corticosteroid-naïve boys (ages 4 to 7 years) participating in the FOR-DMD study. Agreement between the parent-proxy report and the boys' self-report HRQOL was measured using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Factors associated with HRQOL, including standardized psychosocial and behavioral measures in this cross-sectional sample, were explored using correlations. The results showed that the level of agreement between 70 dyads of child self-report and parent-proxy ratings of HRQOL was poor for the generic PedsQL total score (ICC=0.48, 95% CI (0.23, 0.66)) and its subscale scores, and was similarly low for the neuromuscular disease module (ICC=0.24, 95% CI (0.00, 0.45)). Parents rated their child's HRQOL as poorer than the children rated themselves in all scales. Psychosocial outcome measures were more highly associated with HRQOL measures than disease severity or patient demographic variables. In the early phases of DMD, child and parent-proxy HRQOL ratings were discordant. In early DMD, psychosocial and behavioral aspects appear to be more relevant to HRQOL than disease severity factors.

ObjectiveTo determine whether a combination of 2 heart medications would be tolerated and could prevent/delay the onset of cardiomyopathy in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) compared with placebo.MethodsThis multicenter, parallel group, 1:1 patient randomized, placebo-controlled study of prophylactic perindopril and bisoprolol recruited boys with DMD aged 5–13 years, with normal ventricular function. Repeat assessments of left ventricular (LV) function, electrocardiogram, and adverse event reporting were performed 6 monthly. The primary outcome was change in ejection fraction between arms after 36 months. The study was approved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee East Midlands—Derby.ResultsEighty-five boys were recruited (76% on steroid therapy) and randomized to combination heart drugs or matched placebo. Group change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF%) at 36 months from baseline was −2.2% ± 6.0% and −2.9% ± 6.1% in active and placebo arms (adjusted mean difference: −2.1, 95% CI −5.2 to 1.1). There was no difference between treatment arms over repeated assessments (analysis of variance) up to 36 months (trial arms p = 0.53); arm-over-time (p = 0.44). Four participants on placebo but none on active therapy were withdrawn due to deteriorations in LV function. Secondary outcomes did not differ between arms either. Thirty-six serious adverse events occurred none due to cardiac events or trial medication.ConclusionsCombination therapy was well tolerated. Consistent with the previous prophylactic perindopril heart study, there was no evidence of group benefit after 36-month treatment.Classification of EvidenceThis study provides Class I evidence that combination perindopril-bisoprolol therapy was well tolerated but did not change decline in LVEF significantly in boys with DMD.

Background Trials in rare diseases have many challenges, among which are the need to set up multiple sites in different countries to achieve recruitment targets and the divergent landscape of clinical trial regulations in those countries. Over the past years, there have been initiatives to facilitate the process of international study set-up, but the fruits of these deliberations require time to be operationally in place. FOR-DMD (Finding the Optimum Steroid Regimen for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) is an academic-led clinical trial which aims to find the optimum steroid regimen for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for 5 years (July 2010 to June 2015), anticipating that all sites (40 across the USA, Canada, the UK, Germany and Italy) would be open to recruitment from July 2011. However, study start-up was significantly delayed and recruitment did not start until January 2013. Method The FOR-DMD study is used as an example to identify systematic problems in the set-up of international, multi-centre clinical trials. The full timeline of the FOR-DMD study, from funding approval to site activation, was collated and reviewed. Systematic issues were identified and grouped into (1) study set-up, e.g. drug procurement; (2) country set-up, e.g. competent authority applications; and (3) site set-up, e.g. contracts, to identify the main causes of delay and suggest areas where anticipatory action could overcome these obstacles in future studies. Results Time from the first contact to site activation across countries ranged from 6 to 24 months. Reasons of delay were universal (sponsor agreement, drug procurement, budgetary constraints), country specific (complexity and diversity of regulatory processes, indemnity requirements) and site specific (contracting and approvals). The main identified obstacles included (1) issues related to drug supply, (2) NIH requirements regarding contracting with non-US sites, (3) differing regulatory requirements in the five participating countries, (4) lack of national harmonisation with contracting and the requirement to negotiate terms and contract individually with each site and (5) diversity of languages needed for study materials. Additionally, as with many academic-led studies, the FOR-DMD study did not have access to the infrastructure and expertise that a contracted research organisation could provide, organisations often employed in pharmaceutical-sponsored studies. This delay impacted recruitment, challenged the clinical relevance of the study outcomes and potentially delayed the delivery of the best treatment to patients. Conclusion Based on the FOR-DMD experience, and as an interim solution, we have devised a checklist of steps to not only anticipate and minimise delays in academic international trial initiation but also identify obstacles that will require a concerted effort on the part of many stakeholders to mitigate.

Despite corticosteroids being the only treatment documented to improve strength and function in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) corticosteroid prescription is inconsistent and in some countries, corticosteroids are not prescribed. We are conducting a clinical trial that (1) compares the 3 most frequently prescribed corticosteroid regimes; (2) standardizes treatment of DMD complications; and (3) standardizes prevention of corticosteroid side effects. Investigators at 38 sites in 5 countries plan to recruit 300 boys aged 4-7 who are randomly assigned to one of three regimens: daily prednisone; daily deflazacort; or intermittent prednisone (10days on/10days off). Boys are followed for a minimum of 3years to assess the relative effectiveness and adverse event profiles of the different regimens. The primary outcome is a 3-dimensional variable consisting of log-transformed time to rise from the floor, forced vital capacity, and subject/parent satisfaction with treatment, each averaged over all post-baseline visits. The study protocol includes evidence- and consensus-based treatment of DMD complications and of corticosteroid side effects. This study seeks to establish a standard corticosteroid regimen for DMD. Since all new interventions for DMD are being developed as add-on therapies to corticosteroids, defining the optimum regimen is of importance for all new treatments.

IntroductionAlthough cardiologists were ‘late-comers’ to the multidisciplinary team—contributing to the complex care of patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), they now recognise the importance of systematic cardiac surveillance and timely therapy to prolonged survival in patients with DMD. Empirical deployment of cardioactive medications has already improved outcomes, but the evidence base for clinical decision making is weak. Fundamental questions remain as to whether prophylactic therapy is justified and convincingly superior to prompt deployment of the same therapies once left ventricular (LV) dysfunction is detected. Even if it were, at what age should therapy be introduced and with what specific drugs?Methods and analysisWe are conducting a multicentre, parallel group, randomised, placebo-controlled study of combination therapy with an ACE inhibitor (perindopril) and a beta-blocker (bisoprolol) in boys with DMD aged 5–13 years, with normal LV function by echocardiographic criteria at the time of recruitment. Boys are being followed-up for a minimum of 3 years and a maximum of 5 years and undergo repeat assessments of LV function, heart rate and ECG, forced expiratory volume in the 1 s and forced vital capacity, adverse event reporting and quality of life at 6 monthly intervals.The primary outcome is change in LV function between active and placebo-treated participants over the course of the study.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by ‘NRES Committee East Midlands – Derby’. The results will be disseminated through manuscript publications, an international workshop and presentations to scientific meetings and parent forums.Translational aspectsThe study seeks to establish the evidence for prophylactic heart therapies for children with DMD, define the optimum age for their introduction and identify any safety concerns.Article summaryThe protocol describes the design of an ongoing multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled study to establish the evidence for the use of prophylactic heart therapies in children with DMD, define the optimum age for their introduction and identify any safety concerns.Trial registration numbersEudraCT2007-005932-10 andISRCTN50395346; Pre-results.

PurposeSMT C1100 is a utrophin modulator being evaluated as a treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). This study, the first in pediatric DMD patients, reports the safety, tolerability and PK parameters of single and multiple doses of SMT C1100, as well as analyze potential biomarkers of muscle damage.MethodsThis multicenter, Phase 1 study enrolled 12 patients, divided equally into three groups (A-C). Group A were given 50 mg/kg on Days 1 and 11, and 50 mg/kg bid on Days 2 to 10. Group B and C received 100 mg/kg on Days 1 and 11; Group B and Group C were given 100 mg/kg bid and 100 mg/kg tid, respectively, on Days 2 to 10. A safety review was performed on all patients following the single dose and there was at least 2 weeks between each dose escalation, for safety and PK review. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored throughout the study.ResultsMost patients experienced mild AEs and there were no serious AEs. Two patients required analgesia for pain (headache, ear pain and toothache). One patient experienced moderate psychiatric AEs (abnormal behaviour and mood swings). Plasma concentrations of SMT C1100 at Days 1 and 11 indicated a high degree of patient variability regardless of dose. Unexpectedly the SMT C1100 levels were significantly lower than similar doses administered to healthy volunteers in an earlier clinical study. In general, individual baseline changes of creatine phosphokinase, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase levels fell with SMT C1100 dosing.ConclusionsSMT C1100 was well tolerated in pediatric DMD patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02383511.

The continual expression of utrophin protein by pharmacological maintenance of utrophin transcription in dystrophin deficient muscle fibres is a potential disease modifying treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). SMT C1100 is a small molecule utrophin modulator demonstrating significant benefit on the muscular dystrophy in the dystrophin deficient mdx mouse. Assessment of the in vitro and in vivo pharmacology plus the clean toxicology and safety data from the pre-clinical work led to the nomination of SMT C1100 as the first candidate for evaluation in DMD clinical trials. We previously reported that SMT C1100 successfully completed a Phase 1 healthy volunteer trial in which an oral paediatric formulation was deemed safe and well tolerated with plasma levels above those determined to be effective to modulate utrophin levels ex-vivo in DMD myoblasts and dystrophin deficient mdx mice. The first DMD paediatric patient trials of SMT C1100 started with an open-label, single and multiple oral dose finding Phase 1b study in DMD boys earlier this year. The purpose of the study was to determine whether increasing doses of SMT C1100 were safe, well tolerated and to understand the pharmacokinetic properties in patients with DMD. The boys were studied in 3 groups (Groups A to C), with each group consisting of 4 patients aged between 5 to 11 years. The doses for Groups A to C were administered in an escalating manner after safety review for each dose group. We will present the summary data from this trial.