| Literature DB >> 23945290 |
Tatsufumi Nakamura1, Tomohiro Matsuo, Taku Fukuda, Shinji Yamato, Kentaro Yamaguchi, Ikuo Kinoshita, Toshio Matsuzaki, Yoshihiro Nishiura, Kunihiko Nagasato, Tomoko Narita-Masuda, Hideki Nakamura, Katsuya Satoh, Hitoshi Sasaki, Hideki Sakai, Atsushi Kawakami.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human T lymphotropic virus type I (HTLV-I)-associated myelopathy/tropical spastic paraparesis (HAM/TSP) is a chronic myelopathy characterized by motor dysfunction of the lower extremities and urinary disturbance. Immunomodulatory treatments are the main strategy for HAM/TSP, but several issues are associated with long-term treatment. We conducted a clinical trial with prosultiamine (which has apoptotic activity against HTLV-I-infected cells) as a novel therapy in HAM/TSP patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23945290 PMCID: PMC3826868 DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-182
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med ISSN: 1741-7015 Impact factor: 8.775
Profile of HAM/TSP patients enrolled and improvement of motor function in the lower extremities 12 weeks after treatment
| | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | | | | |||||
| 1 | 80 | Female | 23 | No | Yes | | Yes | 6 | 6 | Yes | Yes |
| 2 | 64 | Female | 16 | No | Yes | | Yes | 6 | 6 | Yes | Yes |
| 3 | 57 | Male | 51 | PSL/ IFN-α | Yes | | Yes | 6 | 6 | Yes | Yes |
| 4 | 51 | Female | 36 | No | Yes | | Yes | 9 | 9 | Yes | Yes |
| 5 | 67 | Female | 3 | No | | | Yes | 3 | 3 | No | |
| 6 | 61 | Female | 30 | No | | | Yes | 5 | 5 | Yes | Yes |
| 7 | 68 | Female | 12 | No | | Yes | No | 4 | 4 | Yes | Yes |
| 8 | 64 | Male | 11 | PSL | | Yes | No | 5 | 5 | Yes | No |
| 9 | 66 | Male | 23 | PSL | Yes | | Yes | 9 | 9 | Yes | Yes |
| 10 | 76 | Male | 23 | No | | | No | 6 | 6 | Yes | Yes |
| 11 | 53 | Female | 7 | No | | | Yes | 6 | 6 | Yes | No |
| 12 | 62 | Female | 12 | PSL | | Yes | Yes | 4 | 4 | No | |
| 13 | 44 | Female | 22 | No | | | Yes | 6 | 6 | Yes | No |
| 14 | 56 | Male | 10 | No | Yes | | Yes | 5 | 5 | Yes | Yes |
| 15 | 71 | Female | 45 | No | Yes | | Yes | 9 | 9 | No | |
| 16 | 78 | Female | 18 | No | Yes | | Yes | 5 | 5 | Yes | Yes |
| 17 | 50 | Female | 19 | No | | | No | 5 | 5 | Yes | Yes |
| 18 | 63 | Female | 29 | No | Yes | | Yes | 8 | 8 | Yes | Yes |
| 19 | 62 | Female | 9 | PSL | Yes | | Yes | 8 | 8 | Yes | No |
| 20 | 60 | Female | 34 | No | Yes | | Yes | 2 | 1 | No | |
| 21 | 46 | Female | 26 | PSL | | Yes | No | 2 | 1 | Yes | Yes |
| 22 | 31 | Female | 7 | No | | Yes | No | 4 | 3 | Yes | Yes |
| 23 | 56 | Male | 18 | No | | | Yes | 10 | 10 | No | |
| 24 | 56 | Male | 16 | IFN-α | | | No | 2 | 2 | Yes | Yes |
| Remarks | mean ± SD; | | mean ± SD; | | | | | | | | % improvement: |
| 60.1 ± 11.2 | 20.9 ± 12.1 | 78.9 (P = 0.0003)c | |||||||||
aOsame’s motor function score (OMDS) was rated from 0 to 13 according to the disability grade [13].
bImprovement in spasticity of more than 1 grade according to the modifiedAshworth scale [14].
cStatistical significance was determined by the McNemar test.
IFNα interferon α, PSL prednisolone.
Improvement of motor function in the lower extremities and urinary function 12 weeks after treatment
| | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 26.5 | 21.6 | 18.5 | N.E. | | No | No | No | No | |
| 2 | 15.5 | 9.8 | 36.8 | N.E. | | Yes | No | No | No | |
| 3 | 11.5 | 10.5 | 8.7 | 8.6 | 7.7 | 10.5 | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| 4 | N.E. | | N.E. | | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | ||
| 5 | 5.3 | 4.9 | 7.5 | 3.8 | 3.7 | 2.6 | No | No | Yes | No |
| 6 | 5.9 | 6.2 | -5.1 | 4.1 | 4.2 | -2.4 | No | No | Yes | No |
| 7 | 8.9 | 9.5 | -6.7 | 9.2 | 7.9 | 14.1 | No | No | No | No |
| 8 | 12.6 | 13.3 | -5.6 | 9.5 | 8.6 | 9.5 | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| 9 | N.E. | | N.E. | | Yes | No | No | No | ||
| 10 | 20 | 25.1 | -25.5 | N.E. | | No | No | No | No | |
| 11 | 29.5 | 32.5 | -10.2 | N.E. | | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | |
| 12 | 6.6 | 6.9 | -4.5 | 4.4 | 4.3 | 2.3 | Yes | No | Yes | No |
| 13 | 22.8 | 21.3 | 6.6 | N.E. | | Yes | No | No | No | |
| 14 | 15.4 | 11.3 | 26.6 | 14.3 | 11.4 | 20.3 | No | No | No | No |
| 15 | N.E. | N.E. | | N.E. | | Yes | No | No | No | |
| 16 | 13.7 | 20.9 | -52.6 | N.E. | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | |
| 17 | 13.3 | 11.5 | 13.5 | 10.0 | 7.3 | 27 | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| 18 | N.E. | | N.E. | | Yes | Yes | No | No | ||
| 19 | N.E. | | N.E. | | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | ||
| 20 | 6.9 | 5.7 | 17.4 | 4.5 | 3.5 | 22.2 | No | No | No | No |
| 21 | 5.7 | 4.1 | 28.1 | 3.6 | 3.5 | 2.8 | Yes | No | No | No |
| 22 | 10.3 | 6.8 | 34 | 9.4 | 4.4 | 53.2 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 23 | N.E. | | N.E. | | No | No | Yes | No | ||
| 24 | 4.5 | 4.3 | 4.4 | 3.2 | 3.4 | -6.3 | Yes | No | No | No |
| Remarks | | | | | | | % improvement: | | % improvement: | |
| 68.8 (P = 0.0094)a | 45.5 (P = 0.0736)a | |||||||||
aStatistical significance was determined by the McNemar test. N.E.; not evaluated because of high OMDS.
Changes in N-QoL scores after 12 weeks treatment with prosultiamine
| Q1 Concentration | 0.6 ± 1.0 | 0.3 ± 1.6 | 0.1235 |
| Q2 Low in energy | 0.9 ± 1.1 | 0.4 ± 0.6 | 0.0077 |
| Q3 Sleep during the day | 1.5 ± 1.4 | 1.0 ± 1.1 | 0.0229 |
| Q4 Productiveness | 0.7 ± 0.9 | 0.3 ± 0.6 | 0.0830 |
| Q5 Physical activities | 1.0 ± 1.2 | 0.5 ± 0.8 | 0.0505 |
| Q6 Fluid restriction | 0.8 ± 1.2 | 0.7 ± 0.9 | 0.3270 |
| Q7 Inadequate sleep at night | 1.6 ± 1.5 | 0.7 ± 1.0 | 0.0070 |
| Q8 Disturbance of others | 0.8 ± 1.9 | 0.5 ± 1.8 | 0.0277 |
| Q9 Preoccupation with waking at night | 0.6 ± 1.1 | 0.3 ± 0.6 | 0.1235 |
| Q10 Worry over condition worsening | 1.5 ± 1.5 | 0.8 ± 1.1 | 0.0032 |
| Q11 Worried over treatment options | 1.5 ± 1.6 | 1.0 ± 1.3 | 0.0303 |
| Q12 Overall bother | 1.3 ± 1.3 | 0.8 ± 0.8 | 0.0238 |
| Q13 Overall impact on everyday life | 2.6 ± 2.8 | 0.9 ± 1.0 | 0.0023 |
| Converted overall score (Q1 to 12) | 73.2 ± 21.0 | 85.3 ± 19.9 | 0.0001 |
| Subscale scores: | | | |
| Sleep/Energy (Q1 to5, 7) | 74.0 ± 20.7 | 87.0 ± 15.0 | 0.0001 |
| Bother/Concern (Q6, Q8 to12) | 72.4 ± 25.7 | 83.7 ± 21.2 | 0.0028 |
Subjective symptoms were evaluated using the scores of the Nocturia Quality of Life (N-QoL) questionnaire [15-17]. The score ranges of each question except Q13 are from 0 to 4. The score of Q13 is from 0 to 10. Converted overall score (0–100) = 100 × total converted scores (Q1 to 12)/4 × question numbers, converted score = 4-each raw score. Subscale score (0 to 10) = 100 × total converted scores/4 × question numbers. Statistical significance was determined by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
Figure 1Change in bladder function as evaluated by urodynamic study. Bladder capacity (a) and detrusor pressure (b) increased significantly 12 weeks after prosultiamine treatment. Maximum flow rate (c) increased significantly 12 weeks after prosultiamine treatment as assessed in 18 patients whose voiding function alone was partially reserved. Statistical significance was determined by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
Figure 2Change in human T lymphotropic virus type I (HTLV-I) proviral copy numbers in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). (a) HTLV-I proviral copy numbers from 104 PBMCs decreased gradually until 12 weeks after prosultiamine treatment. The level of HTLV-I proviral copy numbers 12 weeks after prosultiamine treatment decreased by 15.4% compared with the time at pretreatment. (b) Changes in HTLV-I proviral copy numbers in each case between pretreatment and 12 weeks after prosultiamine treatment. Statistical significance was determined by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.