Search

Background Niemann-Pick disease type C (NPC) is a rare autosomal recessive neurodegenerative lysosomal disease characterized by multiple symptoms such as progressive cerebellar ataxia and cognitive decline. The modified amino acid N-acetyl-leucine has been associated with positive symptomatic and neuroprotective, disease-modifying effects in various studies, including animal models of NPC, observational clinical case studies, and a multinational, rater-blinded phase IIb clinical trial. Here, we describe the development of a study protocol (Sponsor Code “IB1001-301”) for the chronic treatment of symptoms in adult and pediatric patients with NPC. Methods This multinational double-blind randomized placebo-controlled crossover phase III study will enroll patients with a genetically confirmed diagnosis of NPC patients aged 4 years and older across 16 trial sites. Patients are assessed during a baseline period and then randomized (1:1) to one of two treatment sequences: IB1001 followed by placebo or vice versa. Each sequence consists of a 12-week treatment period. The primary efficacy endpoint is based on the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia, and secondary outcomes include cerebellar functional rating scales, clinical global impression, and quality of life assessments. Discussion Pre-clinical as well as observational and phase IIb clinical trials have previously demonstrated that IB1001 rapidly improved symptoms, functioning, and quality of life for pediatric and adult NPC patients and is safe and well tolerated. In this placebo-controlled cross-over trial, the risk/benefit profile of IB1001 for NPC will be evaluated. It will also give information about the applicability of IB1001 as a therapeutic paradigm for other rare and common neurological disorders. Trial registrations The trial (IB1001-301) has been registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05163288) and www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu (EudraCT: 2021–005356-10). Registered on 20 December 2021.

Additional file 3. SPIRIT Checklist for Trials.

Additional file 2: Supplementary Table 1. Parent Study schedule of enrolment, interventions, and assessments. Supplementary Table 2. Extension Phase schedule of enrolment, interventions, and assessments.

Additional file 1: Supplementary Material I. Safety Parameters. Supplementary Material II. Data Collection.

Objective: To compare the efficacy of the Sémont maneuver (SM) with the new "SémontPLUS maneuver" (SM+) in patients with posterior canal BPPV canalolithiasis (pcBPPVcan). Methods and Patients: In a prospective trinational (Germany, Italy, and Belgium) randomized trial, patients with pcBPPVcan were randomly assigned to SM or SM+; SM+ means overextension of the head by 60+° below earth horizontal line during the movement of the patient toward the affected side. The first maneuver was done by the physician, and the subsequent maneuvers by the patients 9 times/day on their own. Each morning the patient documented whether vertigo could be induced. The primary endpoints were: "How long (in days) does it take until no attacks can be induced?" and "What is the efficacy of a single SM/SM+?" Results: In the 194 patients analyzed (96 SM, 98 SM+), it took 2 days (median, range 1-21 days, mean 3.6 days) for recovery with SM and 1 day (median, range 1-8 days, mean 1.8 days) with SM+ (p = 0.001, Mann-Whitney U-test). There was no difference in the second primary endpoint (chi2-test, p = 0.39). Interpretation: This prospective trial shows that SM+ is more effective than SM when repeated therapeutic maneuvers are performed but not when a single maneuver is performed. It also supports the hypothesis of the biophysical model: overextension of the head during step 2 brings the clot of otoconia beyond the vertex of the canal, which increases the effectivity. Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class I evidence that SM+ is superior to SM for multiple treatment maneuvers of pcBPPVcan.

Cerebellar ataxias (CAs) represent a heterogeneous group of sporadic or inherited disorders. The clinical spectrum of CAs is continuously expanding. Our understanding of the mechanisms leading to the clinical deficits has improved over these last decades, in particular thanks to progress in genetics, neuroimaging and the advent of relevant animal models allowing the identification of the pathophysiological pathways leading to CAs. The rationale behind treatments is now established for most of the CAs encountered during daily practice worldwide. In this update, we will discuss the symptomatic, physical and occupational therapies now being trialled along with individualized exercises, and present key emerging issues on immune-mediated cerebellar ataxias, hereditary cerebellar ataxias. Finally, we will discuss novel therapeutic approaches, including cerebellar non-invasive stimulation and treatments acting on RNA/proteins. So far, no state-of-the art randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial has shown a convincing clinically relevant efficacy of any drug, with the exception of 4-aminopyridine for the symptomatic treatment of episodic ataxia type 2 and downbeat nystagmus (placebo-controlled trials).