Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39093077›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuromuscular diseases2024

Clinician Perspectives of Gene Therapy as a Treatment Option for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.

Heidi Cope, Ryan Fischer, Emma Heslop, Megan McNiff, Alexandra Johnson, Eric Camino, Brian Denger, Niki Armstrong, Sejal Thakrar, Alison Bateman-House and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuromuscular diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

18 authors.

Heidi CopeRTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Ryan FischerParent Project Muscular Dystrophy, Washington, D.C., USA.
Emma HeslopJohn Walton Muscular Dystrophy Research Centre, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Megan McNiffJohn Walton Muscular Dystrophy Research Centre, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Alexandra JohnsonDuchenne UK, London, UK.
Eric CaminoParent Project Muscular Dystrophy, Washington, D.C., USA.
Brian DengerParent Project Muscular Dystrophy, Washington, D.C., USA.
Niki ArmstrongParent Project Muscular Dystrophy, Washington, D.C., USA.
Sejal ThakrarDuchenne UK, London, UK.
Alison Bateman-HouseDepartment of Population Health, Division of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Katherine L BeaversonPfizer, Inc. New York, NY, USA.
Ione O C WoollacottPfizer Ltd., Tadworth, Surrey, UK.
Dawn PhillipsRegenxbio Inc., Rockville, MD, USA.
Vivian FernandezRegenxbio Inc., Rockville, MD, USA.
Annie GanotSolid Biosciences Inc., Charlestown, MA, USA.
Roxana Donisa-DreghiciSolid Biosciences Inc., Charlestown, MA, USA.
Carol MansfieldRTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Holly PeayRTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a progressive, life-limiting, neuromuscular disorder. Clinicians play an important role in informing families about therapy options, including approved gene therapies and clinical trials of unapproved therapies. Objective: This study aimed to understand the perspectives of clinicians about gene therapy for DMD, which has not previously been studied. Methods: We conducted interviews with specialist clinicians treating patients with DMD in the United States (n = 8) and United Kingdom (n = 8). Interviews were completed in 2022, before any approved gene therapies, to gain insight into barriers and facilitators to implementing gene therapy and educational needs of clinicians. Results: Most respondents expressed cautious optimism about gene therapy. Responses varied regarding potential benefits with most expecting delayed progression and duration of benefit (1 year to lifelong). Concern about anticipated risks also varied; types of anticipated risks included immunological reactions, liver toxicity, and cardiac or renal dysfunction. Clinicians generally, but not uniformly, understood that gene therapy for DMD would not be curative. Most reported needing demonstrable clinical benefit to justify treatment-related risks. Conclusions: Our data demonstrate variability in knowledge and attitudes about gene therapy among clinicians who follow patients with DMD. As our knowledge base about DMD gene therapy grows, clinician education is vital to ensuring that accurate information is communicated to patients and families.

Indexed as

Genetic TherapyMuscular Dystrophy, DuchenneAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHumansMaleUnited KingdomUnited Statesclinical trialsclinician perspectivesduchene muscular dystrophygene therapyPatient preference

Identifiers

PMID39093077
PMCPMC11380263

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.