ArticleNeurology. Genetics2025
Association of
Article in Neurology. Genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Multi-System Roles of Dp71 Dystrophin Isoforms in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.Muscles (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Stepwise genetic testing strategy identified pathogenic variants in 10 Chinese duchenne muscular dystrophy patients.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Test-Retest Reliability of Motor Function and Myometry Outcomes From the Vamorolone Trials in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.Neurology. Genetics · 2025Article
- Understanding Duchenne muscular dystrophy-associated brain pathology.Disease models & mechanisms · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is caused by pathogenic variants of the Methods: We analyzed 186 vamorolone trial participants with DMD (VBP15-002/003; VBP15-004) who were 4 to <7 years old and steroid-naïve at baseline. We stratified participants into gene variant classes by either variant location in the gene affecting different gene promoters (5' [Dp427-only] vs 3' [Dp427+other isoforms]) or residual dystrophin levels (null vs possible non-null [5' gene variants, exon 44 skippable, splice site]). We evaluated associations with baseline motor outcomes and treatment response (prednisone and vamorolone). Results: Participants with variants in ex63 and downstream (null for Dp427+Dp140+Dp71 protein isoforms) showed poorer baseline motor outcomes for time to stand from supine velocity than those with variants in ex1-44 (Dp427 only). No significant baseline differences were found between likely null and possible non-null variants. Participants with only Dp427 involvement showed significantly better treatment response for the 6-minute walk distance. Most of the comparisons of baseline motor function and treatment response were similar between variant classes. Discussion: The large variation in baseline motor function in young, steroid-naïve patients with DMD is only minimally explained by different gene variant classes. While there is strong literature support for 3' variants leading to a more severe motor and cognitive DMD phenotype, we found this variant class under-represented in our clinical trials. This suggests that they may fail inclusion criteria (failure to follow commands; poor motor function). Subgroup analyses in DMD clinical trials at a young age range based on gene variant class may not reveal significant differences and would be relatively noninformative.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.