Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30535218›Full record

ArticleJAMA2018

Effect of Mexiletine on Muscle Stiffness in Patients With Nondystrophic Myotonia Evaluated Using Aggregated N-of-1 Trials.

Bas C Stunnenberg, Joost Raaphorst, Hans M Groenewoud, Jeffrey M Statland, Robert C Griggs, Willem Woertman, Dick F Stegeman, Janneke Timmermans, Jaya Trivedi, Emma Matthews and 5 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02045667 (Combining N-of-1 Trials to Estimate Population Clinical and Cost-effectiveness of Drugs Using Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling. The Case of Mexiletine for Patients With Non- Dystrophic Myotonia.), which is not on this map. Cited by 57 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02045667 phase2completednot on this map

Combining N-of-1 Trials to Estimate Population Clinical and Cost-effectiveness of Drugs Using Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling. The Case of Mexiletine for Patients With Non- Dystrophic Myotonia.

TypeinterventionalSponsorRadboud University Medical CenterRan2014 to 2015Enrolled30ConditionsNon Dystrophic MyotoniaArmsMexiletine, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

57 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Drug treatment for myotonia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Effectiveness and safety of mexiletine versus placebo in patients with myotonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Effectiveness and safety of mexiletine in patients at risk for (recurrent) ventricular arrhythmias: a systematic review.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Treatment updates in myotonic disorders.Journal of neurology · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Advancing Precision Nutrition Through Multimodal Data and Artificial Intelligence.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Protocol of a Series ofCurrent developments in nutrition · 2025
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Pharmacological therapy of non-dystrophic myotonias.Acta myologica : myopathies and cardiomyopathies : official journal of the Mediterranean Society of Myology · 2025
    Review
  20. The role of single case experimental designs in evidence creation in rehabilitation.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Bas C StunnenbergDepartment of Neurology, Donders Institute for Brain Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Joost RaaphorstDepartment of Neurology, Donders Institute for Brain Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Hans M GroenewoudDepartment of Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jeffrey M StatlandDepartment of Neurology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City.
Robert C GriggsDepartment of Neurology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York.
Willem WoertmanDepartment of Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Dick F StegemanDepartment of Neurology, Donders Institute for Brain Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Janneke TimmermansDepartment of Cardiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jaya TrivediDepartment of Neurology and Neurotherapeutics, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Emma MatthewsMRC Centre for Neuromuscular Diseases, UCL Institute of Neurology and National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, London, United Kingdom.
Christiaan G J SarisDepartment of Neurology, Donders Institute for Brain Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Bas J SchouwenbergDepartment of Pharmacology-Toxicology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Gea DrostUniversity of Groningen, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Baziel G M van EngelenDepartment of Neurology, Donders Institute for Brain Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Gert Jan van der WiltDepartment of Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 209583/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: In rare diseases it is difficult to achieve high-quality evidence of treatment efficacy because of small cohorts and clinical heterogeneity. With emerging treatments for rare diseases, innovative trial designs are needed. Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of mexiletine in nondystrophic myotonia using an aggregated N-of-1 trials design and compare results between this innovative design and a previously conducted RCT. Design, Setting, and Participants: A series of aggregated, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled N-of-1-trials, performed in a single academic referral center. Thirty Dutch adult patients with genetically confirmed nondystrophic myotonia (38 patients screened) were enrolled between February 2014 and June 2015. Follow-up was completed in September 2016. Interventions: Mexiletine (600 mg daily) vs placebo during multiple treatment periods of 4 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reduction in daily-reported muscle stiffness on a scale of 1 to 9, with higher scores indicating more impairment. A Bayesian hierarchical model aggregated individual N-of-1 trial data to determine the posterior probability of reaching a clinically meaningful effect of a greater than 0.75-point difference. Results: Among 30 enrolled patients (mean age, 43.4 [SD, 15.24] years; 22% men; 19 CLCN1 and 11 SCN4A genotype), 27 completed the study and 3 dropped out (1 because of a serious adverse event). In 24 of the 27 completers, a clinically meaningful treatment effect was found. In the Bayesian hierarchical model, mexiletine resulted in a 100% posterior probability of reaching a clinically meaningful reduction in self-reported muscle stiffness for the nondystrophic myotonia group overall and the CLCN1 genotype subgroup and 93% posterior probability for the SCN4A genotype subgroup. In the total nondystrophic myotonia group, the median muscle stiffness score was 6.08 (interquartile range, 4.71-6.80) at baseline and was 2.50 (95% credible interval [CrI], 1.77-3.24) during the mexiletine period and 5.56 (95% CrI, 4.73-6.39) during the placebo period; difference in symptom score reduction, 3.06 (95% CrI, 1.96-4.15; n = 27) favoring mexiletine. The most common adverse event was gastrointestinal discomfort (21 mexiletine [70%], 1 placebo [3%]). One serious adverse event occurred (1 mexiletine [3%]; allergic skin reaction). Using frequentist reanalysis, mexiletine compared with placebo resulted in a mean reduction in daily-reported muscle stiffness of 3.12 (95% CI, 2.46-3.78), consistent with the previous RCT treatment effect of 2.69 (95% CI, 2.12-3.26). Conclusions and Relevance: In a series of N-of-1 trials of mexiletine vs placebo in patients with nondystrophic myotonia, there was a reduction in mean daily-reported muscle stiffness that was consistent with the treatment effect in a previous randomized clinical trial. These findings support the efficacy of mexiletine for treatment of nondystrophic myotonia as well as the feasibility of N-of-1 trials for assessing interventions in some chronic rare diseases. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02045667.

Indexed as

AdultBayes TheoremDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMexiletineModels, StatisticalMyotoniaMyotonic DisordersRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRare DiseasesVoltage-Gated Sodium Channel BlockersMexiletineVoltage-Gated Sodium Channel Blockers

Identifiers

PMID30535218
PMCPMC6583079

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.