ReviewCutaneous and ocular toxicology2025
Clinical and pharmacovigilance safety evaluation of LUXTURNA
Review in Cutaneous and ocular toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Sustained improvement in dark-adapted sensitivity but not BCVA after voretigene neparvovec treatment in a mainland Chinese child with biallelicFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLUXTURNA
methodsWe reviewed published literature and regulatory safety databases, including the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System and EudraVigilance, to assess clinical outcomes and adverse event reporting associated with LUXTURNA
resultsClinical trials demonstrated durable functional vision improvements, with approximately 70% of patients maintaining gains up to four years post-treatment. Adverse events reported in trials were largely mild to moderate, such as conjunctival hyperemia, cataract, and transient intraocular pressure elevation. Post-marketing surveillance, however, revealed additional safety concerns, most notably chorioretinal atrophy (CRA), which has been reported in 13-50% of treated eyes, particularly in younger patients and often near the injection site. Disproportionality analyses confirmed CRA as the most prominent adverse event, alongside elevated risks for retinal tears or detachment, intraocular pressure changes, ocular hemorrhage, and inflammation. Despite these findings, central visual acuity was generally preserved, and no systemic toxicity was identified.
conclusionsLUXTURNA
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.