Enabling endpoint development for interventional clinical trials in individuals with Angelman syndrome: a prospective, longitudinal, observational clinical study (FREESIAS).
Angelman syndrome
Clinical outcome assessments
Clinical trials
Digital health technology
EEG
Endpoint development
Natural history
Sleep
UBE3A
Journal
Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders
ISSN: 1866-1955
Titre abrégé: J Neurodev Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101483832
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 07 2023
26 07 2023
Historique:
received:
17
01
2023
accepted:
04
07
2023
medline:
28
7
2023
pubmed:
27
7
2023
entrez:
26
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Angelman syndrome (AS) is a rare neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by the absence of a functional UBE3A gene, which causes developmental, behavioral, and medical challenges. While currently untreatable, comprehensive data could help identify appropriate endpoints assessing meaningful improvements in clinical trials. Herein are reported the results from the FREESIAS study assessing the feasibility and utility of in-clinic and at-home measures of key AS symptoms. Fifty-five individuals with AS (aged < 5 years: n = 16, 5-12 years: n = 27, ≥ 18 years: n = 12; deletion genotype: n = 40, nondeletion genotype: n = 15) and 20 typically developing children (aged 1-12 years) were enrolled across six USA sites. Several clinical outcome assessments and digital health technologies were tested, together with overnight 19-lead electroencephalography (EEG) and additional polysomnography (PSG) sensors. Participants were assessed at baseline (Clinic Visit 1), 12 months later (Clinic Visit 2), and during intermittent home visits. The participants achieved high completion rates for the clinical outcome assessments (adherence: 89-100% [Clinic Visit 1]; 76-91% [Clinic Visit 2]) and varied feasibility of and adherence to digital health technologies. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted participants' uptake of and/or adherence to some measures. It also potentially impacted the at-home PSG/EEG recordings, which were otherwise feasible. Participants achieved Bayley-III results comparable to the available natural history data, showing similar scores between individuals aged ≥ 18 and 5-12 years. Also, participants without a deletion generally scored higher on most clinical outcome assessments than participants with a deletion. Furthermore, the observed AS EEG phenotype of excess delta-band power was consistent with prior reports. Although feasible clinical outcome assessments and digital health technologies are reported herein, further improved assessments of meaningful AS change are needed. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, remote assessments facilitated high adherence levels and the results suggested that at-home PSG/EEG might be a feasible alternative to the in-clinic EEG assessments. Taken altogether, the combination of in-clinic/at-home clinical outcome assessments, digital health technologies, and PSG/EEG may improve protocol adherence, reduce patient burden, and optimize study outcomes in AS and other rare disease populations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Angelman syndrome (AS) is a rare neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by the absence of a functional UBE3A gene, which causes developmental, behavioral, and medical challenges. While currently untreatable, comprehensive data could help identify appropriate endpoints assessing meaningful improvements in clinical trials. Herein are reported the results from the FREESIAS study assessing the feasibility and utility of in-clinic and at-home measures of key AS symptoms.
METHODS
Fifty-five individuals with AS (aged < 5 years: n = 16, 5-12 years: n = 27, ≥ 18 years: n = 12; deletion genotype: n = 40, nondeletion genotype: n = 15) and 20 typically developing children (aged 1-12 years) were enrolled across six USA sites. Several clinical outcome assessments and digital health technologies were tested, together with overnight 19-lead electroencephalography (EEG) and additional polysomnography (PSG) sensors. Participants were assessed at baseline (Clinic Visit 1), 12 months later (Clinic Visit 2), and during intermittent home visits.
RESULTS
The participants achieved high completion rates for the clinical outcome assessments (adherence: 89-100% [Clinic Visit 1]; 76-91% [Clinic Visit 2]) and varied feasibility of and adherence to digital health technologies. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impacted participants' uptake of and/or adherence to some measures. It also potentially impacted the at-home PSG/EEG recordings, which were otherwise feasible. Participants achieved Bayley-III results comparable to the available natural history data, showing similar scores between individuals aged ≥ 18 and 5-12 years. Also, participants without a deletion generally scored higher on most clinical outcome assessments than participants with a deletion. Furthermore, the observed AS EEG phenotype of excess delta-band power was consistent with prior reports.
CONCLUSIONS
Although feasible clinical outcome assessments and digital health technologies are reported herein, further improved assessments of meaningful AS change are needed. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, remote assessments facilitated high adherence levels and the results suggested that at-home PSG/EEG might be a feasible alternative to the in-clinic EEG assessments. Taken altogether, the combination of in-clinic/at-home clinical outcome assessments, digital health technologies, and PSG/EEG may improve protocol adherence, reduce patient burden, and optimize study outcomes in AS and other rare disease populations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37495977
doi: 10.1186/s11689-023-09494-w
pii: 10.1186/s11689-023-09494-w
pmc: PMC10373389
doi:
Types de publication
Observational Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
22Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
J Med Genet. 2001 Dec;38(12):834-45
pubmed: 11748306
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Dec 1;22(12):e24087
pubmed: 33147166
J Pediatr Psychol. 1985 Jun;10(2):215-25
pubmed: 4020603
Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2019 Jul;7(7):e00734
pubmed: 31090212
J Pediatr Orthop. 2004 Sep-Oct;24(5):514-20
pubmed: 15308901
Am J Med Genet A. 2018 Jun;176(6):1327-1334
pubmed: 29696750
Am J Med Genet A. 2020 Jan;182(1):53-63
pubmed: 31729827
BMJ. 2012 Nov 05;345:e6664
pubmed: 23129488
J Autism Dev Disord. 2023 Feb;53(2):720-737
pubmed: 33517526
J Neurodev Disord. 2017 May 8;9:17
pubmed: 28503211
Am J Med Genet. 1989 Feb;32(2):285-90
pubmed: 2564739
Am J Med Genet A. 2019 Jun;179(6):983-992
pubmed: 30942555
J Med Genet. 2003 Feb;40(2):87-95
pubmed: 12566516
Med Care. 2001 Aug;39(8):800-12
pubmed: 11468499
J Clin Neurophysiol. 2006 Aug;23(4):282-93
pubmed: 16885703
NPJ Digit Med. 2019;2(1):
pubmed: 30868107
Psychiatry Res. 1989 May;28(2):193-213
pubmed: 2748771
Am J Ment Defic. 1985 Mar;89(5):485-91
pubmed: 3993694
Eur J Hum Genet. 2019 Sep;27(9):1326-1340
pubmed: 31235867
Biol Psychiatry Glob Open Sci. 2021 Sep;1(3):201-209
pubmed: 34841387
Mol Psychiatry. 2021 Jul;26(7):3625-3633
pubmed: 32792659
Qual Life Res. 2011 Dec;20(10):1727-36
pubmed: 21479777
Nat Genet. 1997 Sep;17(1):75-8
pubmed: 9288101
Clin Neurophysiol. 2001 Apr;112(4):713-9
pubmed: 11275545
Eur J Hum Genet. 1999 Feb-Mar;7(2):131-9
pubmed: 10196695
Nat Genet. 1997 Jan;15(1):70-3
pubmed: 8988171
Pediatr Neurol. 2013 Apr;48(4):271-9
pubmed: 23498559
Patient. 2019 Feb;12(1):97-112
pubmed: 29987743
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2017 Oct 16;12(1):164
pubmed: 29037196
Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2021 Aug;52(4):654-668
pubmed: 32880036
J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2010 Sep;31(7):592-601
pubmed: 20729760
Sleep. 1991 Dec;14(6):540-5
pubmed: 1798888
Am J Med Genet A. 2021 Jan;185(1):168-181
pubmed: 33108066
Nat Rev Neurol. 2016 Oct;12(10):584-93
pubmed: 27615419
Am J Med Genet A. 2013 Sep;161A(9):2197-203
pubmed: 23913711
Eur J Hum Genet. 2019 Nov;27(11):1649-1658
pubmed: 31186545
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005 Jun;76 Suppl 2:ii2-7
pubmed: 15961864
Am J Med Genet A. 2006 Mar 1;140(5):413-8
pubmed: 16470747
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004 Sep 27;2:55
pubmed: 15450120
Sleep Med. 2014 Feb;15(2):219-27
pubmed: 24360535
Qual Life Res. 2010 Aug;19(6):875-86
pubmed: 20405245
Sleep Med Rev. 2018 Feb;37:69-84
pubmed: 28784434
Biol Psychiatry. 2019 May 1;85(9):752-759
pubmed: 30826071
Am J Med Genet A. 2011 Jan;155A(1):81-90
pubmed: 21204213
Eur J Med Genet. 2016 Jun;59(6-7):315-9
pubmed: 27174604
Res Dev Disabil. 2014 Jul;35(7):1742-7
pubmed: 24656292
Pediatr Neurol. 2021 Nov;124:42-50
pubmed: 34536900