SynthesisGene therapy2025
Gene-based therapy for the treatment of spinal muscular atrophy types 1 and 2 : a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Gene therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delphi consensus on gene therapy of spinal muscular atrophy with onasemnogene abeparvovec in Germany, Austria and Switzerland - part II - expert based recommendations for surveillance and management of side-effects.Journal of neuromuscular diseases · 2026Article
- Retrospective analysis of spinal muscular atrophy in tunisian population: phenotypic-genotypic associations and considerations for therapeutic advancement.Neurogenetics · 2026Article
- Five-year experience of a combined newborn screening for spinal muscular atrophy and severe combined immunodeficiency in Liguria, Italy.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- The Long Haul: Microtubule Motors as the Essential Supply Line for Neuronal Longevity.Journal of neurochemistry · 2026Review
- Motor function and safety of nusinersen for spinal muscular atrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis among Chinese patients.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- From Genes to Function: Clinical Experience with the Effectiveness and Safety of Risdiplam and Nusinersen in Spinal Muscular Atrophy.Iranian journal of child neurology · 2026Article
- Therapeutic advances in spinal muscular atrophy: a review of clinical, safety, and economic considerations.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- MR-Guidance of Gene Therapy for Brain Diseases: Moving From Palliative Treatment to Cures.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Review
- Gene Therapy of Adrenomyeloneuropathy: Challenges, Target Cells, and Prospectives.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Glial Cells in Spinal Muscular Atrophy: Speculations on Non-Cell-Autonomous Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications.Neurology international · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite numerous studies identifying the advantages of therapies for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), healthcare professionals encounter obstacles in determining the most effective treatment. This study aimed to investigate the effects of gene-based therapy for SMA. A systematic search was conducted from inception to May 2024 across databases, and all studies assessing the effects of gene-based therapy on patients with SMA types 1 and 2 were included. The outcomes measured were survival, the need for ventilatory support, improvements in motor function, and the occurrence of adverse drug reactions. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. A total of 57 studies (n = 3418) were included, and the meta-analyses revealed that onasemnogene abeparvovec showed the highest survival rate (95% [95% CI: 88, 100]), followed by risdiplam (86% [95% CI: 76, 94]) and nusinersen (60% [95% CI: 50, 70]). The number of patients needing ventilatory support was reduced after treatment with onasemnogene abeparvovec (risk ratio = 0·10 [95% CI: 0·02, 0·53]). Onasemnogene abeparvovec and risdiplam had similar proportions of patients with improvements in the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Infant Test of Neuromuscular Disorders score of ≥4 points (92% [95% CI: 62, 100] vs 90% [95% CI: 77, 97]). In contrast, nusinersen had the smallest improvement (74% [95% CI: 66, 81]). The most frequently observed adverse drug reactions were headaches, vomiting, and gastrointestinal disorders. Gene-based therapy benefits patient survival and improves motor function. Onasemnogene abeparvovec and risdiplam appear highly effective, whereas nusinersen exhibits moderate effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.