Mexiletine versus lamotrigine in non-dystrophic myotonias: a randomised, double-blind, head-to-head, crossover, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.

IF 46.5 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Vinojini Vivekanandam, Iwona Skorupinska, Dipa L Jayaseelan, Emma Matthews, Richard J Barohn, Michael P McDermott, Michael G Hanna
{"title":"Mexiletine versus lamotrigine in non-dystrophic myotonias: a randomised, double-blind, head-to-head, crossover, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.","authors":"Vinojini Vivekanandam, Iwona Skorupinska, Dipa L Jayaseelan, Emma Matthews, Richard J Barohn, Michael P McDermott, Michael G Hanna","doi":"10.1016/S1474-4422(24)00320-X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Non-dystrophic myotonias are skeletal muscle channelopathies caused by ion channel dysfunction. Symptom onset is frequently in the first decade of life, causing disability in a young cohort. Although there is no cure, symptomatic treatments exist. Previous trials provide evidence of the efficacy of mexiletine. More recently, lamotrigine has been shown to be effective. Both treatments have different profiles, including pharmacokinetics and adverse events. This trial aimed to investigate whether lamotrigine is non-inferior to mexiletine to directly inform clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We did a randomised, double-blind, crossover, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (London, UK). Participants (aged ≥18 years) who had genetically confirmed symptomatic non-dystrophic myotonia were randomly assigned (1:1), by means of a block randomisation schedule created by a computer program, to receive either mexiletine for 8 weeks followed by lamotrigine for 8 weeks, or lamotrigine followed by mexiletine, with a 7-day washout period in between. Investigators and participants were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was the mean interactive voice response (IVR) diary stiffness score (0-9 scale) over the participant's final 2 weeks of diary reporting in each treatment period. Non-inferiority was assessed using a mixed-effects model with a predefined margin of 0·5 and included all randomly assigned participants who contributed at least 7 days of IVR-diary data in either treatment period. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05017155, and EudraCT, 2020-003375-17.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Between Aug 1, 2021, and Dec 12, 2022, of 60 participants were screened (24 females and 36 males) and randomly assigned between Aug 1, 2021 and Dec 12, 2022, to either the mexiletine-lamotrigine sequence (n=30) or the lamotrigine-mexiletine sequence (n=30). 53 participants contributed data to the primary analysis. The mean IVR stiffness score after treatment with mexiletine was 2·54 (95% CI 1·98 to 3·10) versus 2·77 (2·21 to 3·32) with lamotrigine (mean mexiletine-lamotrigine difference -0·23 [95% CI -0·63 to 0·17]). The most common adverse event with both treatments was indigestion-reflux (eight participants, 208 participant-days receiving mexiletine; seven participants, 130 participant-days receiving lamotrigine). No serious adverse events were reported.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>We were unable to conclude that lamotrigine is non-inferior to mexiletine; however, improvements in all outcome measures from baseline were similar between lamotrigine and mexiletine. Lamotrigine is an important treatment consideration in non-dystrophic myotonias alongside mexiletine; we propose a treatment algorithm to guide clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>Neuromuscular Study Group, Jon Moulton Charity Trust, UCLH BRC Fast Track Grant.</p>","PeriodicalId":17989,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Neurology","volume":"23 10","pages":"1004-1012"},"PeriodicalIF":46.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(24)00320-X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Non-dystrophic myotonias are skeletal muscle channelopathies caused by ion channel dysfunction. Symptom onset is frequently in the first decade of life, causing disability in a young cohort. Although there is no cure, symptomatic treatments exist. Previous trials provide evidence of the efficacy of mexiletine. More recently, lamotrigine has been shown to be effective. Both treatments have different profiles, including pharmacokinetics and adverse events. This trial aimed to investigate whether lamotrigine is non-inferior to mexiletine to directly inform clinical practice.

Methods: We did a randomised, double-blind, crossover, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (London, UK). Participants (aged ≥18 years) who had genetically confirmed symptomatic non-dystrophic myotonia were randomly assigned (1:1), by means of a block randomisation schedule created by a computer program, to receive either mexiletine for 8 weeks followed by lamotrigine for 8 weeks, or lamotrigine followed by mexiletine, with a 7-day washout period in between. Investigators and participants were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was the mean interactive voice response (IVR) diary stiffness score (0-9 scale) over the participant's final 2 weeks of diary reporting in each treatment period. Non-inferiority was assessed using a mixed-effects model with a predefined margin of 0·5 and included all randomly assigned participants who contributed at least 7 days of IVR-diary data in either treatment period. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05017155, and EudraCT, 2020-003375-17.

Findings: Between Aug 1, 2021, and Dec 12, 2022, of 60 participants were screened (24 females and 36 males) and randomly assigned between Aug 1, 2021 and Dec 12, 2022, to either the mexiletine-lamotrigine sequence (n=30) or the lamotrigine-mexiletine sequence (n=30). 53 participants contributed data to the primary analysis. The mean IVR stiffness score after treatment with mexiletine was 2·54 (95% CI 1·98 to 3·10) versus 2·77 (2·21 to 3·32) with lamotrigine (mean mexiletine-lamotrigine difference -0·23 [95% CI -0·63 to 0·17]). The most common adverse event with both treatments was indigestion-reflux (eight participants, 208 participant-days receiving mexiletine; seven participants, 130 participant-days receiving lamotrigine). No serious adverse events were reported.

Interpretation: We were unable to conclude that lamotrigine is non-inferior to mexiletine; however, improvements in all outcome measures from baseline were similar between lamotrigine and mexiletine. Lamotrigine is an important treatment consideration in non-dystrophic myotonias alongside mexiletine; we propose a treatment algorithm to guide clinical practice.

Funding: Neuromuscular Study Group, Jon Moulton Charity Trust, UCLH BRC Fast Track Grant.

美西雷定与拉莫三嗪治疗非肌营养不良性肌张力障碍:随机、双盲、头对头、交叉、非劣效性三期试验。
背景:非萎缩性肌营养不良症是由离子通道功能障碍引起的骨骼肌通道病。该病通常在患者出生后的头十年发病,导致年轻群体致残。虽然无法治愈,但有对症治疗方法。以前的试验证明了美西律汀的疗效。最近,拉莫三嗪也被证明有效。这两种治疗方法具有不同的特点,包括药代动力学和不良反应。本试验旨在研究拉莫三嗪是否不劣于甲西利定,从而为临床实践提供直接参考:我们在英国国立神经病学和神经外科医院(伦敦)进行了一项随机、双盲、交叉、非劣效性的三期试验。参试者(年龄≥18岁)经基因证实患有症状性非肌营养不良性肌张力障碍,他们通过计算机程序创建的分块随机分配表(1:1)被随机分配到两种药物中,一种是先接受8周的阿西列汀治疗,然后再接受8周的拉莫三嗪治疗,另一种是先接受拉莫三嗪治疗,然后再接受阿西列汀治疗,中间有7天的冲洗期。研究人员和参与者均被蒙蔽,不知道治疗分配。主要结果测量指标是每个治疗期间参与者最后两周的交互式语音应答(IVR)日记僵硬度平均得分(0-9分制)。采用混合效应模型评估非劣效性,预设差值为 0-5,包括所有在任一治疗期提供至少 7 天 IVR 日志数据的随机分配参与者。该试验已在 ClinicalTrials.gov 和 EudraCT 注册,注册号分别为 NCT05017155 和 2020-003375-17:2021年8月1日至2022年12月12日期间,共筛选了60名参与者(24名女性和36名男性),并在2021年8月1日至2022年12月12日期间随机分配到甲西利定-拉莫三嗪序列(30人)或拉莫三嗪-甲西利定序列(30人)。53 名参与者为主要分析提供了数据。使用甲西利定治疗后,IVR僵硬度平均得分为2-54(95% CI 1-98至3-10),而使用拉莫三嗪为2-77(2-21至3-32)(甲西利定-拉莫三嗪平均差异为-0-23 [95% CI -0-63至0-17])。两种疗法最常见的不良反应都是消化不良-反流(8 名患者,208 个疗程服用甲西利汀;7 名患者,130 个疗程服用拉莫三嗪)。没有严重不良事件的报告:我们无法得出拉莫三嗪不劣于甲西利汀的结论;但是,拉莫三嗪和甲西利汀的所有结果指标与基线相比均有相似的改善。拉莫三嗪是非肌萎缩性肌病治疗的一个重要考虑因素,可与麦西来坦并用;我们提出了一种治疗算法,以指导临床实践:Neuromuscular Study Group、Jon Moulton Charity Trust、UCLH BRC Fast Track Grant。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Lancet Neurology
Lancet Neurology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
58.70
自引率
1.00%
发文量
572
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Lancet Neurology is the world-leading clinical neurology journal. It publishes original research that advocates for change in, or sheds light on, neurological clinical practice. The topics covered include cerebrovascular disease, Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, epilepsy, migraine, neurological infections, movement disorders, multiple sclerosis, neuromuscular disorders, peripheral nerve disorders, pediatric neurology, sleep disorders, and traumatic brain injury. The journal publishes a range of article types, including Articles (including randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses), Review, Rapid Review, Comment, Correspondence, and Personal View. It also publishes Series and Commissions that aim to shape and drive positive change in clinical practice and health policy in areas of need in neurology. The Lancet Neurology is an internationally trusted source of clinical, public health, and global health knowledge. It has an Impact Factor of 48.0, making it the top-ranked clinical neurology journal out of 212 journals worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信