Survival, Motor Function, and Motor Milestones: Comparison of AVXS-101 Relative to Nusinersen for the Treatment of Infants with Spinal Muscular Atrophy Type 1

Abstract

IntroductionInfants with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) type 1 typically face a decline in motor function and a severely shortened life expectancy. Clinical trials for SMA type 1 therapies, onasemnogene abeparvovec (AVXS-101) and nusinersen, demonstrated meaningful improvements in efficacy (e.g., overall survival) but there were no head-to-head clinical trials assessing comparative efficacy. This study estimated the treatment effects of AVXS-101 relative to nusinersen for the treatment of SMA type 1.MethodsOverall survival, event-free survival (no death or need to use permanent assisted ventilation), improvement in motor function [increase of ≥ 4 points in Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Infant Test of Neuromuscular Disorders (CHOP-INTEND) score from baseline], and motor milestone achievements (head control, rolling over, and sitting unassisted) reported in the onasemnogene abeparvovec (AVXS-101-CL-101; NCT02122952) and nusinersen (ENDEAR; NCT02193074) clinical trials were indirectly compared using frequentist and Bayesian approaches.ResultsAmong symptomatic infants with SMA type 1, the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one more death with AVXS-101 instead of nusinersen was 6.2 [95% confidence intervals (CI) = 4.1–12.2], and the probability of preventing death was 20% higher for patients treated with AVXS-101 than nusinersen [risk ratio (RR) = 1.2, 95% CI 1.1–1.3]. For event-free survival, the NNT to prevent one more event was 2.6 (95% CI 2.0–3.6) and RR was 1.6 (95% CI 1.4–1.9). For improvement in motor function, NNT was 3.5 (95% CI 2.6–5.3) and RR was 1.4 (95% CI 1.2–1.6). For milestone achievements, the NNTs were 1.4 (95% CI 1.1–1.9), 1.5 (95% CI 1.1–2.5), and 1.2 (95% CI 1.0–1.5); RRs 4.2 (95% CI 2.6–6.7), 7.8 (95% CI 3.6–17.0), and 11.2 (95% CI 5.1–24.5) for head control, rolling over, and sitting unassisted, respectively. Results were similar using the Bayesian approach.ConclusionThis indirect comparison (AVXS-101-CL-101 vs. ENDEAR) among symptomatic SMA type 1 infants suggests that AVXS-101 may have an efficacy advantage relative to nusinersen for overall survival, independence from permanent assisted ventilation, motor function, and motor milestones.FundingAveXis.

New Treatments in Spinal Muscular Atrophy: Positive Results and New Challenges

“…Authors demonstrated an efficacy advantage of onasemnogene abeparvosec in terms of motor milestones achieved, motor function (CHOP-INTEND score) improvement and independence from permanent assisted ventilation. Moreover, the probability of preventing death was 20% higher in the onasemnogene abeparvosec treated group [ 90 ]. However, the main drawback of this study is the use of an unanchored indirect analysis of NNT between two studies.…”

Onasemnogene Abeparvovec-xioi: Gene Therapy for Spinal Muscular Atrophy

“…13 The vector crosses the blood-brain barrier and transports the gene to the motor neuron cells in the central nervous system. 13,14 After administration, the shed vector DNA was found in the saliva, urine, and stool. 11 Concentrations were undetectable at 3 weeks in the saliva and urine and by 1 to 2 months in the stool.…”

RNA-Targeted Therapies and High-Throughput Screening Methods

“…Despite there having been no study directly comparing Zolgensma to Spinraza to date, several papers have provided indirect comparisons. In general, these report a no difference in clinical efficacy, or a slight benefit leaning towards the use of Zolgensma [90]. Similarly, in terms of cost-effectiveness, the two therapies would appear to be similar, with Zolgensma again potentially being slightly cheaper long-term [91].…”