Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33905493›Full record

Trial reportBrain : a journal of neurology2021

The unfolded protein response in amyotrophic later sclerosis: results of a phase 2 trial.

Eleonora Dalla Bella, Enrica Bersano, Giovanni Antonini, Giuseppe Borghero, Margherita Capasso, Claudia Caponnetto, Adriano Chiò, Massimo Corbo, Massimiliano Filosto, Fabio Giannini and 20 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Brain : a journal of neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. The Hallmarks of Aging: From Molecular Mechanisms to Clinical Translation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. ISR Modulators in Neurological Diseases.Current neuropharmacology · 2025
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

30 authors at 20 institutions in 3 countries.

Eleonora Dalla Bella3rd Neurology Unit and Motor Neuron Disease Centre, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico "Carlo Besta", Milan 20133, Italy.
Enrica Bersano3rd Neurology Unit and Motor Neuron Disease Centre, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico "Carlo Besta", Milan 20133, Italy.
Giovanni AntoniniNESMOS Department, Neuromuscolar Disease Unit, Sant'Andrea Hospital and University of Rome "Sapienza", Rome 00189, Italy.
Giuseppe BorgheroNeurologic Unit, Monserrato University Hospital, Cagliari 09042, Italy.
Margherita CapassoNeurologic Clinic, SS. Annunziata Hospital, Chieti 66100, Italy.
Claudia CaponnettoSan Martino Polyclinic Hospital, Genoa 16132, Italy.
Adriano ChiòALS Centre "Rita Levi Montalcini", Department of Neuroscience, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Massimo CorboDepartment of Neurorehabilitaton, Casa Cura Policlinico, Milan, Italy.
Massimiliano FilostoDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, ASST Spedali Civili Brescia and NeMO-Brescia Clinical Centre for Neuromuscular Diseases, Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2852-7512
Fabio GianniniDepartment of Medical and Surgery Sciences and Neurosciences, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.
Rossella SpataroALS Research Centre, BioNeC, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8910-3131
Christian LunettaNEuroMuscular Omnicentre of Milan, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4788-1875
Jessica MandrioliDepartment of Neurosciences, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Modena, Modena, Italy.
Sonia MessinaUnit of Neurology and Neuromuscular Disorders, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine and University of Messina, AOU Policlinico "G. Martino", Messina, Italy.
Maria Rosaria Monsurrò"Luigi Vanvitelli" Campania University Naples, Napoli, Italy.
Gabriele MoraICS Maugeri IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Nilo RivaDepartment of Neurology IRCCS "San Raffaele" Hospital, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0513-9517
Romana RizziNeurology Unit, Department of Neuro-Motor Diseases, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale, IRCCS of Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Gabriele SicilianoDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Neurology Unit, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Vincenzo SilaniDepartment of Neurology-Stroke Unit and Laboratory of Neuroscience, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Isabella SimoneDepartment of Neurology and Psychiatry, University of Bari, Italy.
Gianni SorarùDepartment of Neurosciences, University of Padua, Italy.
Valeria TugnoliDepartment of Neuroscience and Rehabilitation, Division of Neurology, University Hospital of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Lorenzo VerrielloNeurology Unit, S. Maria della Misericordia University Hospital, Udine, Italy.
Paolo VolantiIntensive Neurorehabilitation Unit, ICS Maugeri IRCCS, Mistretta, Italy.
Roberto FurlanClinical Neuroimmunology Unit, Institute of Experimental Neurology, Division of Neuroscience, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
John M NolanDrew University, Caspersen School of Graduate Studies, Madison, NJ, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1234-0304
Emmanuelle AbgueguenInFlectis BioScience, Nantes, France.
Irene TramacereScientific Directorate, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico "Carlo Besta", Milan, Italy.
Giuseppe Lauria3rd Neurology Unit and Motor Neuron Disease Centre, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico "Carlo Besta", Milan 20133, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9773-020X
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta · ITIstituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri · ITUniversity of Milan · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Citta' della Salute e della Scienza di Torino · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Sant'Andrea · ITAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Modena · ITAzienda Sanitaria Unità Locale di Reggio Emilia · ITCasa di Cura Columbus · ITDrew University · USInFlectis BioScience · FROspedale Policlinico San Martino · ITOspedale Santa Maria della Misericordia di Udine · ITOspedale SS. Annunziata · ITSan Raffaele University of Rome · ITUniversity of Bari Aldo Moro · ITUniversity of Brescia · ITUniversity of Cagliari · ITUniversity of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITUniversity of Ferrara · ITUniversity of Messina · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Strong evidence suggests that endoplasmic reticulum stress plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) through altered regulation of proteostasis. Robust preclinical findings demonstrated that guanabenz selectively inhibits endoplasmic reticulum stress-induced eIF2α-phosphatase, allowing misfolded protein clearance, reduces neuronal death and prolongs survival in in vitro and in vivo models. However, its safety and efficacy in patients with ALS are unknown. To address these issues, we conducted a multicentre, randomized, double-blind trial with a futility design. Patients with ALS who had displayed an onset of symptoms within the previous 18 months were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive 64 mg, 32 mg or 16 mg of guanabenz or placebo daily for 6 months as an add-on therapy to riluzole. The purpose of the placebo group blinding was to determine safety but not efficacy. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients progressing to higher stages of disease within 6 months as measured using the ALS Milano-Torino staging system, compared with a historical cohort of 200 patients with ALS. The secondary outcomes were the rate of decline in the total revised ALS functional rating scale score, slow vital capacity change, time to death, tracheotomy or permanent ventilation and serum light neurofilament level at 6 months. The primary assessment of efficacy was performed using intention-to-treat analysis. The treatment arms using 64 mg and 32 mg guanabenz, both alone and combined, reached the primary hypothesis of non-futility, with the proportions of patients who progressed to higher stages of disease at 6 months being significantly lower than that expected under the hypothesis of non-futility and a significantly lower difference in the median rate of change in the total revised ALS functional rating scale score. This effect was driven by patients with bulbar onset, none of whom (0/18) progressed to a higher stage of disease at 6 months compared with those on 16 mg guanabenz (4/8; 50%), the historical cohort alone (21/49; 43%; P = 0.001) or plus placebo (25/60; 42%; P = 0.001). The proportion of patients who experienced at least one adverse event was higher in any guanabenz arm than in the placebo arm, with higher dosing arms having a significantly higher proportion of drug-related side effects and the 64 mg arm a significantly higher drop-out rate. The number of serious adverse events did not significantly differ between the guanabenz arms and the placebo. Our findings indicate that a larger trial with a molecule targeting the unfolded protein response pathway without the alpha-2 adrenergic related side-effect profile of guanabenz is warranted.

Indexed as

Adrenergic alpha-2 Receptor AgonistsAgedAmyotrophic Lateral SclerosisDouble-Blind MethodFemaleGuanabenzHumansMaleMiddle AgedUnfolded Protein ResponseAdrenergic alpha-2 Receptor AgonistsGuanabenzamyotrophic lateral sclerosisguanabenzunfolded protein response

Identifiers

PMID33905493
PMCPMC8557337
OpenAlexW3159328850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.