Rethinking phase 2 trials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

There is a long history in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) of promoting therapies based on phase 2 data, which then fail in phase 3 trials. Experience suggests that studies of 6 months in duration are too short, especially with function-based outcome measures. Multiplicity poses a serious threat to data interpretation, and strategies to impute missing data may not be appropriate for ALS where progression is always expected. Emerging surrogate markers of clinical benefit such as reduction of neurofilament light chain levels may be better suited to phase 2 go/no-go decisions. Over-interpretation of phase 2 data, and overly optimistic communication of exploratory analyses must be avoided to ensure optimal prioritization for the investment needed for definitive phase 3 trials and to minimize the harm of false hope for people living with ALS. Delivering on advances in understanding of the neurobiology of ALS requires urgent attention to phase 2 design and implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Brain
Published
2024-12-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awae396
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.95

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rethinking phase 2 trials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Michael Benatar, Martin R. Turner, Christopher J. McDermott, Ruben P. A. van Eijk
8 citations
Brain
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
2.95
article

Rethinking phase 2 trials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Michael Benatar, Martin R. Turner, Christopher J. McDermott, Ruben P. A. van Eijk
article en
8 citations

Abstract

There is a long history in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) of promoting therapies based on phase 2 data, which then fail in phase 3 trials. Experience suggests that studies of 6 months in duration are too short, especially with function-based outcome measures. Multiplicity poses a serious threat to data interpretation, and strategies to impute missing data may not be appropriate for ALS where progression is always expected. Emerging surrogate markers of clinical benefit such as reduction of neurofilament light chain levels may be better suited to phase 2 go/no-go decisions. Over-interpretation of phase 2 data, and overly optimistic communication of exploratory analyses must be avoided to ensure optimal prioritization for the investment needed for definitive phase 3 trials and to minimize the harm of false hope for people living with ALS. Delivering on advances in understanding of the neurobiology of ALS requires urgent attention to phase 2 design and implementation.

BrainVol. 148(4)
University of Miami (US), University Medical Center Utrecht (NL), University of Oxford (GB), University of Sheffield (GB)
National Institutes of Health
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
2.95
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Rethinking phase 2 trials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis — Michael Benatar, Martin R. Turner, et al. · Brain (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS