In the process of writing a blog post on the research findings altering neurological practice, my sight fell on the drug, Masitinib. I was completely unaware of this tyrosine kinase inhibitor, one of the promising drugs in the fight against multiple sclerosis (MS). We are likely to hear a lot more about Masitinib in MS in the coming months.
Masitinib is however not flexing its muscles just in neuro-inflammation. On the contrary, it is seeking laurels far afield, in the realm of neuro-degeneration. I was indeed pleasantly surprised to find that researchers are studying the impact of Masitinib on two other horrible scourges of neurology. The first report I came across is the favourable outcome of a phase 3 trial of Masitinib in motor neurone disease (MND) or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The drug reportedly ‘reached its primary objectives‘ of efficacy and safety. In this trial, Masitinib was used as an add-on to Riluzole, the established MND drug. It’s all jolly collaborative at this stage, but who knows what threat Masitinib will pose to Riluzole in future! You may read a bit more on Masitinib and MND in this piece from Journal of Neuroinflammation.
The second report I came across is the potential of Masitinib in the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). This is at the phase 2 trial stage, and already showing very good outcomes in people with mild to moderate AD. Masitinib was used as an add-on drug to the conventional AD medications Memantine, Donepezil, Galantamine and Rivastigmine. These drugs can therefore rest comfortably on their thrones…at least for now! You can read a bit more on Masitinib and AD in this article from Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics.
The question however remains, why should one drug work well on such disparate diseases? I know, this feels like deja vu coming shortly after my last blog post titled Alzheimers disease and its promising links with diabetes. In that post I looked at the promise of the diabetes drug, Liraglutide, in the treatment of Alzheimers disease. I have however also reviewed this type of cross-boundary activity of drugs in my older posts, Will riluzole really be good for cerebellar ataxia? and old drugs, new roles?Perhaps Masitinib is another pointer that, as we precisely define the cause of diseases, they will turn out to be merely different manifestations of the same pathology. Food for thought.
As I said, this wasn’t the post I set out to write. So watch out for my next blog post, the major research outcomes altering neurological practice.
This is just a quick post on a recent paper in Lancet Neurology which looked at the potential benefit of Riluzole in the treatment of cerebellar ataxia.
Neurologist know Riluzole very well. It is the only drug that has even the slightest hint of slowing down the dreadful motor neurone disease (MND). It is however fraught with side effects and demands a strict regime of regular blood tests to monitor for liver toxicity; this puts many people off it. Many neurologists are also sceptical of its reported benefits (in whispering tones of course).
The authors studied subjects with the genetic conditions spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) and Friedreich’s ataxia (FA). They used the SARA scoring system to monitor for improvement in the study subjects. And their faith was rewarded; 50% of the subjects on Riluzole improved compared to only 11% of the subjects on placebo. The authors suggest further trials to confirm the benefit. The academically minded will pick apart the methodology and statistical significance; the neurologist on the coal face will hold on to any hope.
Motor neurone disease (MND) is, to say the least, dreadful. It also doesn’t help that the terminology neurologists use adds to the distress. West of the Atlantic, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) means MND but goes eastwards and it is only a subtype of MND. Thankfully, for most Americans at least, there is no confusion; it is simply Lou Gehrigdisease.
MND however remains a conundrum for neurologists who are struggling to solve its puzzling riddles. MND researchers continue to toil and sweat, but their efforts are bearing fruits. Take for example the great strides that established the link between MND and the C9ORF72 gene. What are the promising prospects in the world of MND? Here are some.
Associations: Thiamine deficiency and Diabetes
Should we be on the lookout for thiamine deficiency in patients with MND? This question is prompted by an article in the JNNP which shows an unexpectedly high frequency of laboratory, but not clinical, thiamine deficiency. Titled Thiamine deficiency in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, the paper reported thiamine deficiency in about 28% of subjects with MND. The authors did not impute any causal association, and there is nothing to suggest that replenishing the thiamine improved outcomes. It is still worth thinking about because people with MND, as the paper emphasised, are at risk of thiamine deficiency.
Will MND ever be a curable disease? A big question, but this is the vision of all the hard-working researchers in this field. What are the prospects for a cure? One group of researchers believe the answer is in preventing misfolding of TDP-43, the protein that plays an important role in MND. They set out their case in an article published in Neurotherapeutics titled TDP-43 Proteinopathy and ALS: Insights into Disease Mechanisms and Therapeutic Targets. And don’t worry, its free access. The bold abstract says it all: “we present the case that preventing the misfolding of TDP-43 and/or enhancing its clearance represents the most important target for effectively treating ALS”. The proof of the pudding….
Diagnostic test: Nerve ultrasound
Making the diagnosis of MND is not always (make that is hardly ever) straightforward. In the early stages, symptoms are vague, and clinical signs are non-specific. MND also has many mimics. One of such mimics is multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN). To distinguish this and other mimics from MND, neurologist rely on a test called nerve conduction study (NCS). Even this however is not always helpful.
Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is not a test neurologist rely upon to make the diagnosis of MND. Not anymore it seems, going by an article in American Journal of Neuroradiology. The paper is titled A Potential Biomarker in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. In the article, the authors assessed the amount of iron deposition in the brains of people with MND using the MRI techniques called SWI and DTI. Their findings suggest that the amount of iron in the motor cortex and motor tracts of the brain is a good guide to the presence of MND. If confirmed, this technique will help to reduce the long time it often takes before neurologists confirm their suspicions of MND to patients and their families.
The outcome of MND, poor as it often is, varies quite widely. This is influenced by several factors such as the type of MND, use of the medicine riluzole, and multidisciplinary care. New research suggests that neurofilament light chain (NfL) may be a more sensitive marker of prognosis. This is reported in an article published in Neurology titled Neurofilament light chain: A prognostic biomarker in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The authors demonstrated that patients with MND have much higher levels of NfL than those without the disease. Furthermore, subjects with MND who had the highest levels at the onset had a higher mortality hazard ratio. I think I know what that means.
Prognostic scale: ALS-MITOS predictive system
A paper in the JNNP has proposed a new predictive system for MND called ALS-MITOS, reportedly better than the more familiar ALSFRS-R. The report is titled The MITOS system predicts long-term survival in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Most practicing neurologists wouldn’t know the difference because they don’t to use such predictive systems. But MND researchers would be licking their lips at the prospect of a better measure of disease progression; it will make it much easier for them to show that their interventions really do work!
There are >100 mutations in the superoxide dismutase 1 (SOD-1), a gene known to cause MND. SOD-1 is an enzyme that binds both copper and zinc, and when defective it results in mutant copper (don’t worry, I’m just finding this out myself). Acting on this hypothesis, researchers came up with a crafty way of delivering normal copper into the central nervous system of mice modelled with SOD-1 MND. Publishing in Neurobiology of Disease, the authors showed how they achieved this with CuATSM, a chemical that contains copper and currently used for PET scans. CuATSM is readily transported into the nervous system, delivering its copper as it does so.
Every recalcitrant disease is today threatened with gene therapy. Considering it has a long list of genetic risk factors, why should MND be any different? Research taking steps in this direction is therefore long overdue. One such step was published in Gene Therapy and is titled Healthy and diseased corticospinal motor neurons are selectively transduced upon direct AAV2-2 injection into the motor cortex.The authors report that they successfully transduced motor nerves of mice models of MND. In doing so they have set the stage for gene therapy in MND. I don’t claim to understand it all, but it sounds very much like they have set the ball rolling. Promising.
Three recent articles caught my interest because they point to potential new roles for old drugs.
The first paper in the Lancet Neurology suggests a role for Riluzole in hereditary cerebellar ataxia. With 50% of the treatment arm improving against 11% of the placebo arm, I hope this is not false hope for patients with Friedreich’s ataxia (FA) and spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA).