Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25897255›Full record

ReviewThe application of clinical genetics2015

Emerging pharmacologic treatment options for fragile X syndrome.

Tori L Schaefer, Matthew H Davenport, Craig A Erickson

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The application of clinical genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Sex Differences in Brain Disorders.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Modeling Fragile X Syndrome inFrontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2018
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tori L SchaeferDivision of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Matthew H DavenportDivision of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Craig A EricksonDivision of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is the most common single gene cause of intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder. Caused by a silenced fragile X mental retardation 1 gene and the subsequent deficiency in fragile X mental retardation protein, patients with FXS experience a range of physical, behavioral, and intellectual debilitations. The FXS field, as a whole, has recently met with some challenges, as several targeted clinical trials with high expectations of success have failed to elucidate significant improvements in a variety of symptom domains. As new clinical trials in FXS are planned, there has been much discussion about the use of the commonly used clinical outcome measures, as well as study design considerations, patient stratification, and optimal age range for treatment. The evidence that modification of these drug targets and use of these failed compounds would prove to be efficacious in human clinical study were rooted in years of basic and translational research. There are questions arising as to the use of the mouse models for studying FXS treatment development. This issue is twofold: many of the symptom domains and molecular and biochemical changes assessed and indicative of efficacy in mouse model study are not easily amenable to clinical trials in people with FXS because of the intolerability of the testing paradigm or a lack of noninvasive techniques (prepulse inhibition, sensory hypersensitivity, startle reactivity, or electrophysiologic, biochemical, or structural changes in the brain); and capturing subtle yet meaningful changes in symptom domains such as sociability, anxiety, and hyperactivity in human FXS clinical trials is challenging with the currently used measures (typically parent/caregiver rating scales). Clinicians, researchers, and the pharmaceutical industry have all had to take a step back and critically evaluate the way we think about how to best optimize future investigations into pharmacologic FXS treatments. As new clinical trials are coming down the drug discovery pipeline, it is clear that the field is moving in a direction that values the development of molecular biomarkers, less subjective quantitative measures of symptom improvement, and rating scales developed specifically for use in FXS in conjunction with drug safety. While summarizing preclinical evidence, where applicable, and discussing challenges in FXS treatment development, this review details both completed clinical trials for the targeted and symptomatic treatment of FXS and introduces novel projects on the cusp of clinical trial investigation.

Indexed as

anxietyautismclinical trialfragile X syndromeintellectual disability

Identifiers

PMID25897255
PMCPMC4396424
OpenAlexW2013514775

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.