Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2025
Effectiveness and Safety of Nusinersen and Risdiplam in Spinal Muscular Atrophy: A Systematic Review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mehrabian Amin, Auguste Peter, Grove Amy, Brown Anna, Parr Janette, Patel Mubarak, Butt Furqan, Donoghue Jeremiah, Yousefi Mehdi, Parsons Jo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) is a rare genetic disorder marked by progressive muscle weakness and mobility loss. It has a profound physical, emotional and social impact on patients and caregivers, requiring comprehensive medical and supportive care. SMA is classified into Types 1-4, with some individuals identified presymptomatically. This systematic review examined the safety and effectiveness of nusinersen and risdiplam for treating SMA.
METHODS: We searched research databases, relevant websites and existing systematic reviews. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by two authors, with discrepancies resolved by a third. Internal quality appraisal ensured methodological rigour. A total of 131 studies reported in 148 sources were included. The review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024512226).
RESULTS: Both treatments showed improvements in motor function and milestones, with high survival rates across most SMA types. Motor function improvements were consistent, but other outcomes-such as bulbar and respiratory function, and ventilation needs-were variable. Adverse events were common across all treatments and SMA types, with some serious cases reported, including deaths in Types 1 and 2.
INTERPRETATION: This comprehensive review highlights the clinical effectiveness and safety of nusinersen and risdiplam across all SMA types. However, variability in outcomes and limited comparative data introduce uncertainty. The findings underscore the need for more high-quality randomised controlled trials to strengthen the evidence base for SMA treatment.
METHODS: We searched research databases, relevant websites and existing systematic reviews. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by two authors, with discrepancies resolved by a third. Internal quality appraisal ensured methodological rigour. A total of 131 studies reported in 148 sources were included. The review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024512226).
RESULTS: Both treatments showed improvements in motor function and milestones, with high survival rates across most SMA types. Motor function improvements were consistent, but other outcomes-such as bulbar and respiratory function, and ventilation needs-were variable. Adverse events were common across all treatments and SMA types, with some serious cases reported, including deaths in Types 1 and 2.
INTERPRETATION: This comprehensive review highlights the clinical effectiveness and safety of nusinersen and risdiplam across all SMA types. However, variability in outcomes and limited comparative data introduce uncertainty. The findings underscore the need for more high-quality randomised controlled trials to strengthen the evidence base for SMA treatment.