Literature DB >> 35333888

Prognostic indicators of disease progression in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: A literature review and evidence synthesis.

Nermina Ferizovic1,2, Jessica Summers1, Igor Beitia Ortiz de Zárate3, Christian Werner4, Joel Jiang5, Erik Landfeldt6, Katharina Buesch7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a rare, severely debilitating, and fatal neuromuscular disease characterized by progressive muscle degeneration. Like in many orphan diseases, randomized controlled trials are uncommon in DMD, resulting in the need to indirectly compare treatment effects, for example by pooling individual patient-level data from multiple sources. However, to derive reliable estimates, it is necessary to ensure that the samples considered are comparable with respect to factors significantly affecting the clinical progression of the disease. To help inform such analyses, the objective of this study was to review and synthesise published evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD. We searched MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid) and the Cochrane Library (via Wiley) for records published from inception up until April 23 2021, reporting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD. Risk of bias was established with the grading system of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM).
RESULTS: Our search included 135 studies involving 25,610 patients from 18 countries across six continents (Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North America and South America). We identified a total of 23 prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD, namely age at diagnosis, age at onset of symptoms, ataluren treatment, ATL1102, BMI, cardiac medication, DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, drisapersen, edasalonexent, eteplirsen, glucocorticoid exposure, height, idebenone, lower limb surgery, orthoses, oxandrolone, spinal surgery, TAS-205, vamorolone, vitlolarsen, ventilation support, and weight. Of these, cardiac medication, DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, and glucocorticoid exposure were designated core prognostic indicators, each supported by a high level of evidence and significantly affecting a wide range of clinical outcomes.
CONCLUSION: This study provides a current summary of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD, which will help inform the design of comparative analyses and future data collection initiatives in this patient population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35333888      PMCID: PMC8956179          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265879

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


1. Introduction

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a rare, neuromuscular disease characterised by progressive muscle degeneration caused by mutations in the X-linked DMD gene [1, 2]. The DMD gene encodes dystrophin, a structural protein which forms part of complexes predominantly found in muscle cells where it plays a significant role in the stabilisation of cell membranes [3]. To date, over 1,100 mutations have been identified, including 891 responsible for DMD phenotypes [4]. The incidence of DMD has been estimated at between 1 in 3,500 and 5,000 live male births [5, 6]. Patients with DMD are diagnosed around the age of four years, but many boys show symptoms earlier due to proximal muscle weakness resulting in delayed physical milestones (e.g., walking, running, and climbing stairs). As the disease progresses, patients become non-ambulatory usually in their early teens, followed by increasing loss of upper limb strength and function [7-11]. Respiratory and cardiac decline ensue, with patients eventually requiring mechanical ventilation support for survival [9, 10]. The median life expectancy at birth is around 30 years [12]. At present, there is no cure for DMD, and standard of care is mainly aimed at managing disease symptoms and promoting patient quality of life [13]. In medical research, it is occasionally necessary to pool patient-level data from different studies to indirectly assess the efficacy of a treatment due to low statistical power because of small patient samples and/or the absence of direct comparators in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). To minimize bias in such analyses, it is important to ensure that the populations to be compared are sufficiently homogeneous with respect to factors that would be expected to directly or indirectly affect outcomes of interest [14]. For example, in the context of DMD, it would be relevant to adjust any indirect comparison for the current age of the patient, among other factors, given the progressive, age-related nature of the disease. However, to date, no study has systematically reviewed the body of evidence for factors affecting disease progression outcomes in DMD. To bridge this evidence gap, the objective of this study was to review and synthesise the published evidence on prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD.

2. Methods

This literature review was conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement [15]. The study protocol is not publicly available due to intellectual property restrictions.

2.1. Search strategy

We searched MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid) and the Cochrane Library (via the Wiley online platform) for records of studies published from inception up until April 23 2021, reporting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD. The search string contained “Duchenne muscular dystrophy” as a Medical Subject Heading term or free text term in combination with variations of the free text term “prognostic indicator”. For example, the MEDLINE population terms were: 1. “exp Muscular Dystrophy, Duchenne/”, 2. “(Duchenne and dystro*).mp.” and 3. “1 or 2”. These were combined with the prognostic indicator terms; 4. “(prognos* or (disease adj3 course) or (disease adj3 impact) or natural history or (disease adj3 predict*) or (disease adj3 outcome) or (disease adj3 progres*)).mp.” and 5. “3 and 4”. Then the searches filtered out irrelevant study designs with the following; 6. “(comment or letter or editorial or notes or review).pt.”, 7. “(exp animals/ or exp invertebrate/ or animal experiment/ or animal model/) and (human/)” and 8. “(exp animals/ or exp invertebrate/ or animal experiment/ or animal model/) not 7”, 9. “6 or 8” and 10. “5 not 9”. Full search strings are provided in S1 Appendix.

2.2. Selection criteria

Eligibility criteria based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study design (PICOS) framework for study inclusion are presented in Table 1. Only English language texts were included. For the purposes of this review, a prognostic indicator was defined as any factor, either endogenous or exogenous, affecting the clinical progression of disease.
Table 1

PICOS eligibility criteria for study inclusion.

InclusionExclusion
Population Patients diagnosed with DMDPatients without a diagnosis of DMD
Intervention AnyNone
Comparators AnyNone
Outcome Prognostic indicator of disease progressionNone
Study design AnySystematic literature reviews and meta-analyses were not formally included, but screened for relevant references

Note: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study design (PICOS). Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD).

Note: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study design (PICOS). Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD).

2.3. Screening and data extraction

One investigator (NF) initially screened article titles and abstracts for eligibility, and subsequently reviewed full-text versions of selected records. The reason for exclusion was recorded and confirmed by a second investigator (JS). For all articles that met the inclusion criteria upon full-text review, the following information was extracted into a pre-designed data extraction form: Author, year, geographical setting, study design, interventions, patient sample population characteristics, disease progression outcome measures, prognostic indicators, and the impact of the prognostic indicators on disease progression. For the purpose of this review, we only considered statistically significant prognostic indicators (as reported in the included studies). We synthesised extracted evidence of the impact of identified prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD into eight outcome categories: cardiac health and function, loss of independent ambulation, lower extremity and motor function, muscle strength, respiratory health and function, scoliosis, survival, and upper extremity function. Although loss of ambulation is a clinical milestone within the lower extremity and motor function domain, we decided to report evidence separately for this factor given its central role in DMD research (e.g., as a primary endpoint in RCTs). Due to the monotonic progression of DMD, we did not consider current age a prognostic factor of interest, nor bisphosphonate therapy because of the negative impact from both glucocorticoids and DMD on bone health [13].

2.4. Level of evidence

The level of evidence of included studies was established using a modified version of the grading system of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) [16]. Specifically, five levels of evidence were designated based on study design: (1) systematic review of randomised trials or n-of-1 trials, (2) randomised trial or observational study with dramatic effect, (3) non-randomised controlled cohort/follow-up study, (4) case-series, case-control studies, or historically controlled studies, and (5) mechanism-based reasoning. For reporting purposes, we categorised evidence levels 1 and 2 as “high level of evidence”, level 3 as “moderate level of evidence”, and levels 4 and 5 as “low level of evidence”.

3. Results

The search was performed on April 26 2021, and resulted in the identification of 3,018 publications (including journal articles and congress/conference abstracts) reporting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD (Fig 1). Of these, 740 records were duplicates, 1,966 excluded following title and abstract screening, and 312 selected for full-text review. An additional 54 articles were included from the reference searches of identified systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and meta-analyses (MAs). Finally, 294 publications were considered for data extraction, with 135 studies reporting statistically significant prognostic indicators of disease progression that were subsequently included for evidence synthesis and grading. Summary details of the included studies are presented in Table 2. Identified studies encompassed 25,610 patients with DMD from 18 countries (Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Canada, China, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, Holland, India, Italy, Japan, Korea, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States).
Fig 1

PRISMA diagram of the selection process of the included publications.

Note: † Studies reporting evidence of statistically significant prognostic indicator of disease progression in DMD. Systematic literature reviews (SLRs). Meta-analyses (MAs).

Table 2

Characteristics of included studies and identified prognostic indicators in DMD.

Author, year (country)Study design (level of evidence)Interventions, DMD genetic modifiers, and/or DMD mutation typesPatient populationDisease progression outcome categoryDisease progression outcome resultsIdentified prognostic indicator
Biggar et al., 2006 (CA) [17]Non-randomised controlled cohort(Level 3)DFZ74 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 10–18 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved fractional shortening and ejection fractionGlucocorticoid exposure
Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved and sustained FVC
Houde et al., 2008 (CA) [18]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ79 patients with DMD treated with DFZ (mean age: 13 years, range: NR) or no treatment (mean age: 18 and 10 years, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved fractional shortening, ejection fraction, and reduced risk of cardiomyopathyGlucocorticoid exposure
ScoliosisLower mean degrees of scoliosis
Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation
Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved FVC
Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength as given by MRC
Silversides et al., 2003 (CA) [19]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ33 patents with DMD treated with DFZ (mean age: 14 years, range: 10–18 years) or no treatment (mean age: 16 years, range: 11–18 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved fractional shortening, ejection fraction, and LVEDdGlucocorticoid exposure
Respiratory Health and FunctionPreserved pulmonary function
Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation
Barber et al., 2013 (US) [20]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED462 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionReduced risk of cardiomyopathy onset versus untreated and linked to duration of useGlucocorticoid exposure
Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation linked to duration of use
Bello et al., 2019 (IT) [21]Bello et al., 2019 (IT) [22]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PREDLTBP4, minor alleles at SPP1, and CD40 SNPsDp140 and Exon 8 skipping374 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionDFZ and PDN/PREDImproved ejection fractionLTBP4Preserved ejection fractionGlucocorticoid exposure; DMD genetic modifiers; and DMD mutation type
Respiratory Health and FunctionDp140Reduced FVCDFZ and PDN/PREDImproved FVCSPP1 and CD40 SNPsReduced FVCExon 8 skippingHigher PEF
Tandon et al., 2015 (US) [23]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED98 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionDecline in LVEF linked to duration of useGlucocorticoid exposure
Zhang et al., 2015 (CN) [24]Non-randomised controlled cohort study(Level 3)DFZ and PDN/PRED77 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 2–13 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionIncreased summed rest scoreGlucocorticoid exposure
Schram et al., 2013 (CA) [25]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PREDAll patients were receiving cardiac medication (ACE inhibitors/ARBs)86 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionReduced risk of cardiomyopathy, improved fractional shortening, ejection fraction, and LVEDdGlucocorticoid exposure
SurvivalReduction in all-cause mortality
Markham et al., 2008 (US) [26]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED37 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved LVEDd, shortening fraction, mWS, and VCFcGlucocorticoid exposure
Markham et al., 2005 (US) [27]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED111 patients with DMD treated with DFZ and PDN/PRED (mean age: 11 years, range: 3–21 years) or no treatment (mean age: 12 years, range: 3–21 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved fractional shorteningGlucocorticoid exposure
Kim et al., 2017 (US) [28]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED255–660 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionIncreased risk of cardiomyopathy linked to duration of useGlucocorticoid exposure
Respiratory Health and FunctionReduced FVC function linked to duration of use
Aikawa et al., 2019 (JP) [29]Case series(Level 4)ACE inhibitor (cilazapril or enalapril)21 patients with DMD (median age: 12 years, IQR: 6–16 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved LVEFCardiac medication
Kwon et al., 2012 (KR) [30]Randomised trial(Level 2)ACE inhibitor (enalapril) or BB (carvedilol)23 patients with DMD (mean age: 13 years, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionBBImproved LVMPIACEImproved LVESd and left ventricular free wall systolic myocardial velocityCardiac medication
Kajimoto et al., 2006 (JP) [31]Non-randomised controlled cohort(Level 3)ACE inhibitor (enalapril), or ACE inhibitor (enalapril) and BB (carvedilol)25 patients with DMD treated with ACE inhibitors/BBs (mean age: 18 years, range: 7–27 years) or ACE inhibitors (mean age: 15 years, range 8–29 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionACEImproved LVEDdACE/BBImproved LVFSCardiac medication
Thrush et al., 2012 (US) [32]Thrush et al., 2012 (US) [33]Case-control study(Level 4)ACE inhibitor (drug NR), or ACE inhibitor (drug NR) and BB (drug NR)25 patients with DMD treated with ACE inhibitors/BBs(mean age: 16 years, range: NR) or ACE inhibitors(mean age: 14 years, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionBoth ACE inhibitor and ACE inhibitor/BB improved ejection fraction compared to natural historyCardiac medication
Viollet et al., 2012 (US) [34]Case-control study(Level 4)ACE inhibitor (lisinopril), or ACE inhibitor (lisinopril) and BB (metoprolol)54 patients with DMD treated with ACE inhibitors/BBs (mean age: 16 years, range: 10–24 years) or ACE inhibitors (mean age: 14 years, range: 7–27 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved ejection fraction versus natural history controlCardiac medication
Jefferies et al., 2005 (US) [35]Case series(Level 4)ACE inhibitor (drug NR) and BB (drug NR)62 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved LVEDd, LVEF, LVMPI, and left ventricular sphericity indexCardiac medication; and DMD mutation type
Exon 51 and 52Cardioprotective
Exon 12,14, 15, 16, and 17Onset of cardiomyopathy
Raman et al., 2015 (US) [36]Randomised trial(Level 2)EPL and PLC42 patients with DMD treated with EPL (mean age: 15 years, range: 12–19 years) or PLC (mean age: 15 years, range: 11–19 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved left ventricular systolic strain, LVEF, and ESVCardiac medication
Matsumura et al., 2010 (JP) [37]Non-randomised controlled cohort study(Level 3)BB54 patients with DMD treated with BBs (mean age: 19 years, range: 11–29 years) or BSC (mean age: 23 years, range: 15–35 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionReduction in heart failure and arrhythmiasCardiac medication
Van Ruiten et al., 2017 (UK) [38]Case control(Level 4)Cardiac medication (drug NR)108 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Cardiac Health and FunctionTiming of cardiac medication impacts on cardiomyopathyCardiac medication
DFZ and PDN/PREDLoss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure
Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved FVC
Fayssoil et al., 2018 (FR) [39]Case series(Level 4)Ventilation support in combination with cardiac medication (drug NR)101 patients with DMD (median age: 21 years, IQR: 18–26 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionDecreased left atrium diameter and LVEFVentilation support
Nagai et al., 2020 (JP) [40]Case-control study(Level 4)ACTN3 null genotype77 patients with DMD (median age: NR; IQR: 7.9–11.5 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionEarlier onset of cardiac dysfunction; early onset of LV dilation; lower LV dilation-free rateDMD genetic modifier
Cheeran et al., 2017 (US) [41]Case-control study(Level 4)BMI43 patients with DMD (median age: 21 years; IQR: 21–24 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionHigher BMI is associated with reduced cardiomyopathyBMI
Duboc et al., 2005 (FR) [42]Duboc et al., 2007 (FR) [43]Randomised trial(Level 2)Perindopril and PLC57 patients with DMD (mean: NR; range: 9.5–13 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionMaintains LVEFCardiac medication
SurvivalImprovement in survival
Ishikawa et al., 1999 (NR) [44]Follow-up study(Level 3)ACE (enalapril and lisinopril) and BB11 patients with DMD (mean age: 17; range: 12.6–22.8)Cardiac Health and FunctionIncreased LVEFCardiac medication
Ramaciotti et al., 2006(USA) [45]Case-series(Level 4)ACE (enalapril)50 patients with DMD (mean age: NR; range: 10–20 years)Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved left ventricular functionCardiac medication
King et al., 2007 (US) [46]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED143 patients with DMD treated with DFZ and PDN/PRED (mean age: 17 years, range: 6–31 years) or no treatment (mean age: 14 years, range: 2–40 years)ScoliosisLower mean degrees of scoliosisGlucocorticoid exposure
Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation
Balaban et al., 2005 (NR) [47]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED49 patients with DMD treated with DFZ (mean age: 14 years, range: NR) or PDN/PRED (mean age: 15 years, range: NR) or no treatment (mean age: 14 years, range: NR)ScoliosisReduced number of spinal surgeries versus untreatedGlucocorticoid exposure
Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved FVC between 7–15 years old versus untreated
Muscle StrengthGrip and pinch strength (maximum hand-held weight which could be lifted overhead) improved in DFZ and PDN/PRED versus untreated
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved walk/run 9 metres, STS, and 4SC versus untreated
Alman et al., 2004 (CA) [48]Non-randomised controlled cohort study(Level 3)DFZ54 patients with DMD treated with DFZ (mean age: 9 years, range: NR) or no treatment (mean age: 9 years, range: NR)ScoliosisDecrease in rate of scoliosis > 20 degrees and need for spinal surgeryGlucocorticoid exposure
Lebel et al., 2013 (CA) [49]Non-randomised controlled cohort study(Level 3)DFZ54 patients with DMD treated with DFZ (mean age: 9 years, range: NR) or no treatment (mean age: 9 years, range: NR)ScoliosisDecrease in rate of scoliosis > 20 degrees and need for spinal surgeryGlucocorticoid exposure
SurvivalReduction in mortality
Kinali et al., 2007 (UK) [50]Case series(Level 4)KAFOS; PDN/PRED123 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)ScoliosisKAFOSLonger duration of use reduces scoliosis severityPDN/PREDLater age at scoliosis onset linked to duration of useOrthoses; and Glucocorticoid exposure
McDonald et al., 2018 (*) [51]Observational study with dramatic effect(Level 2)DFZ and PDN/PRED440 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 2–28 years)SurvivalReduction in mortality (>1 year of exposure)Glucocorticoid exposure
Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation (>1 year of exposure) and favouring DFZ
Upper extremity functionRetained hand function as given by Brooke score (>1 year of exposure) and favouring DFZ
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved STS (>1 year of exposure) and favouring DFZ
Ogata et al., 2009 (JP) [52]Case series(Level 4)ACE inhibitor (enalapril/lisinopril) and BB (bisoprolol/carvedilol/metoprolol)52 patients with DMD receiving symptomatic treatment (mean age: 18 years, range: NR) or asymptomatic treatment (mean age: 20 years, range: NR)SurvivalOverall survival improved in the early treatment (asymptomatic) groupCardiac medication
Rall and Grim, 2012 (DE) [53]Case-control study(Level 4)Ventilation support94 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)SurvivalImproved overall survivalVentilation support
Jeppesen et al., 2003 (DK) [54]Case-control study(Level 4)Ventilation support159 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)SurvivalReduction in all-cause mortalityVentilation support
Eagle et al., 2007 (UK) [55]Case-control study(Level 4)Spinal surgery and ventilation; ventilation no spinal surgery; no spinal surgery or ventilation100 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)SurvivalSpinal surgery/ ventilation and ventilation no spinal surgery improved survival with spinal surgery/ventilation having a larger impactVentilation support; and spinal surgery
Eagle et al., 2002 (UK) [56]Case-control study(Level 4)Nocturnal ventilation support183 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)SurvivalReduction in mortalityVentilation support
Gomez-Merino et al., 2002 (NR) [57]Case-control study(Level 4)Non-invasive respiratory aids91 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)SurvivalProlongation of survivalVentilation support
Kieny et al., 2013(FR) [58]Case-control study(Level 4)Ventilation support119 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)SurvivalProlongation of survivalVentilation support
Ishikawa et al., 2011(JP) [59]Case-control study(Level 4)Non-invasive respirator aids (including mechanically assisted coughing)187 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)SurvivalProlongation of survival compared to invasive treatmentVentilation support
Adorisio et al., 2019(NR) [60]Case-control study(Level 4)Left ventricular assist device in combination with cardiac medication and OMT12 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)SurvivalImproved survivalLeft ventricular assist device
Davidson et al., 2012 (AU) [61]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED144 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationReduction in risk of loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure; and DMD mutation type
Dystrophin gene deletionsIncreased risk of loss of ambulation
Bonifati et al., 2006 (IT) [62]Non-randomised controlled cohort study(Level 3)DFZ and PDN/PRED48 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationEarly treatment initiation and increased treatment duration delay loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure
Bello et al., 2015 (*) [63]Bello et al., 2015 (*) [64]Bello et al., 2015 (*) (IT) [65]Observational study with dramatic effect(Level 2)DFZ and PDN/PRED340 patients with DMD (283 for the genotype sub-population) (mean age: 16 years, range: 5–33 years)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation; DFZ more favourableGlucocorticoid exposure; and DMD genetic modifiers
TG/GG genotype at SPP1 rs28357094Earlier loss of ambulation
LTBP4 haplotypeDelayed loss of ambulation
Bello et al., 2014 (*) [66]Observational study with dramatic effect(Level 2)DFZ and PDN/PRED332 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation, DFZ more favourableGlucocorticoid exposure; and DMD genetic modifiers
G allele at SPP1rs28357094Earlier loss of ambulation
Bello et al., 2016 (*) [11]Observational study with dramatic effect(Level 2)DFZ and PDN/PREDDeletion of exon 3–7 and exon 44 skipping212 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure; and DMD mutation type
Bello et al., 2016 (*) [67]Exon 44 skippingDMD mutation type
Goemans et al., 2019 (*) [68]Goemans et al., 2019 (*) [69]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED85 patients with DMD (mean age: 9 years, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationPredictive of loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure; greater weight; lower height; and lower BMI (in combination)
Kim et al., 2015 (US) [70]Observational study with dramatic effect(Level 2)DFZ and PDN/PRED477 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation with larger effect for those treated longer in the <11 year oldsGlucocorticoid exposure
Schara et al., 2001 (DE) [71]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ13 patients with DMD (mean: NR, range: 9–18 years)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure
Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved FVC
Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength as given by MRC scale
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved Vignos functional score, STS, 4SC, and walking ability
Van den Bergen et al., 2014 (NL) [72]Retrospective observational study (Level 2)Glucocorticoids (drug NR)336 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure
Van den Bergen et al., 2014 (NL) [73]Case control study(Level 4)Glucocorticoids (drug NR)Exon 44 (vs. 45, 51, and 53)114 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure; and DMD mutation type
Wang et al., 2014 (US) [74]Online survey(Level 5)DFZ and PDN/PRED1,057 patients with DMD(mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation with DFZ favourable over PDN/PREDGlucocorticoid exposure
Age at diagnosisDelay in loss of ambulationAge at diagnosis
Ricotti et al., 2012 (UK) [75]Ricotti et al., 2011 (UK) [76]Ricotti et al., 2011 (UK) [77]Case series(Level 4)PDN/PRED334–400 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 3–15 years)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation in daily PDN-treated compared to intermittent PDNGlucocorticoid exposure
DeSilva et al., 1987 (US) [78]Non-randomised controlled cohort study(Level 3)PDN/PRED54 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure
Yilmaz et al., 2004 (TR) [79]Yilmaz et al., 2004 (TR) [80]Tunca et al., 2001 (TR) [81]Historically controlled cohort study(Level 4)PDN/PRED88 patients with DMD treated with PDN/PRED (mean age: 7 years, range: 3–11 years) or no treatment (mean age: 7 years, range: 5–9 years)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 10WRT at 6 months
Yilmaz et al., 2004 (TR) [79]Yilmaz et al., 2004 (TR) [80]Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength as given by Lovett’s tests
Biggar et al., 2001 (CA) [82]Case control(Level 4)DFZ54 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure
Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved FVC
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 4SC and STS
Ciafaloni et al., 2013 (US) [83]Ciafaloni et al., 2016 (US) [84]Observational study with dramatic effect(Level 2)Age at onset of symptoms825 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationEarlier loss of ambulation for earlier symptom developmentAge at onset of symptoms
Bello et al., 2016 (*) [85]Genome-wide association study(Level 4)Minor allele at rs1883832109 patients with DMD (mean age: NR; range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationDMD genetic modifiers
Haber et al., 2021 (US) [86]Case control study(Level 4)Exon 8 and Exon 44 skip deletions358 patients with DMD (mean age: NR; range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationDMD mutation type
Mercuri et al., 2020 (NR) [87]Non-randomised controlled study (Level 3)ATA compared to external controls181 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR) or external control (mean age: NR, range: 2–28 years)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationATA treatment
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved STS and 4SC
Wang et al., 2018 (*) [88]Case series (Level 4)Glucocorticoids; DMD mutation type765 patients with DMD (mean age: NR; range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation:Glucocorticoids, exon 44, exon 3–7, exon 45, exon 8Earlier loss of ambulation:Exon 51, exon 49–50Glucocorticoid exposure; DMD mutation type
Forst et al., 1995 [89] (GER)Observational study with dramatic effect (Level 2)Lower limb surgery213 patients with DMD (mean age: 6.56 years; range: 4.02–8.26)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationLower limb surgery
Forst et al., 1995 [90] (GER)Observational study with dramatic effect (Level 2)Lower limb surgery123 patients with DMD (mean age: NR; range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationLower limb surgery
Servais et al., 2015 (FR) [91]Case-control study (Level 4)Exon 5353 patients with DMD (DMD 53: mean age: 13.9, range: NR or DMD-all-non-53: mean age: 14 years, range: NR or DMD-del-non-53: mean age: 14.1, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation compared to DMD-all-non-53 and DMD del-non-53DMD mutation type
Cardiac Health and FunctionLower LVEF and higher contracture score compared to DMD-del-non-53
Muscle StrengthLower pinch strength in exon 53 compared to DMD-all-non-53
Escolar et al., 2011 (US) [92]Randomised controlled trial(Level 2)PDN/PRED (daily dose with PLC at weekend; weekend dose with PLC during weekdays)64 patients with DMD (mean age: 7 years, range: NR)Respiratory Health and FunctionWeekend dosing equivalent to daily dosing as given by MVV; MIPGlucocorticoid exposure
Upper Extremity FunctionWeekend dosing equivalent to daily dosing as given by Brooke score
Muscle StrengthWeekend dosing equivalent to daily dosing as given by QMT and MMT
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionWeekend dosing equivalent to daily dosing as given by STS, 4SC and 10WRT
Tachas et al., 2020(NR) [93]Randomised trial (Level 2)ATL1102 compared to external natural history control29 patients with DMD (mean age: 14.9 years, range: 12–18 years) or external control (mean age: 15.61, range: NR)Upper Extremity FunctionImproved upper limb function as given by PULATL1102 treatment
Daftary et al., 2007 (US) [94]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED35 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 7–21 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionLong-term glucocorticoid therapy improves PCF and MEPGlucocorticoid exposure
Abresch et al., 2013 (*) [95]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED341 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 6–28 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved MIP, MEP and PCFGlucocorticoid exposure
Henricson et al., 2013 (*) [96]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED (current users vs. naïve users)340 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 2–28 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved FVC; MIP; PEFR; FEV1Glucocorticoid exposure
Upper Extremity FunctionImproved Brooke score
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved Vignos, STS, 4SC, and 10WRT
McDonald et al., 2018 (*) [97]Case control study(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED397 patients with DMD (median: 9 years, IQR: 2–28 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved FVCGlucocorticoid exposure
Henricson et al., 2017 (US) [98]McDonald et al., 2017 (US) [99]Case control(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED233 patients with DMD (mean age: 13 years, range: 6–28 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionSustained FVC and PEFRGlucocorticoid exposure
Ricotti et al., 2011 (UK) [77]Case series(Level 4)PDN/PRED334–400 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 3–15 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionSustained FVC in daily PDNGlucocorticoid exposure
Pradhan 2006 (IN) [100]Non-randomised controlled cohort study(Level 3)PDN/PRED34 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved short-term PEFRGlucocorticoid exposure
Muscle StrengthImproved MRC
Fenichel et al., 1991 (US) [101]RCT(Level 2)PDN/PRED103 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 5–15 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionDaily and alternate day PDN/PRED improved FVC and MVV at 12 monthsGlucocorticoid exposure
Muscle StrengthDaily and alternate day PDN/PRED improved muscle strength using an unspecified measure at 6 months but more sustained with dailyBoth doses improved muscle mass as given by creatinine excretion
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionDaily and alternate day PDN/PRED improved STS and 4SC
Dubow et al., 2016 (NR) [102]RCT(Level 2)DFZ and PDN/PRED45 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Respiratory Health and Function1.2 mg/kg/day dose of DFZ versus PLC improves MVVGlucocorticoid exposure
Comi et al., 2017 (*) [103]McDonald et al., 2016 (*) [104]Historically-controlled study(Level 4)ATA167 patients with DMD (mean age: 16 years, range: NR)Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved FVCATA treatment
Kelley et al., 2019 (*) [105]Case series(Level 4)Gly16 ADRB2 polymorphism175 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 3–25 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionGly16 genotype 6.52X likelier of receiving nocturnal ventilation compared to Arg16Patient weightPredictor of need for nocturnal ventilationDMD genetic modifier; weight
Angliss et al., 2020 (AU) [106]Case control (Level 4)Ventilation29 patients with DMD (median: 14.66; IQR: NR)Respiratory Health and FunctionFVC improved in steroid naïve but accelerated decline in steroid usersVentilation support
Bello et al., 2020 (IT) [107]Case control (Level 4)DMD mutation type and DMD genetic modifiers; Glucocorticoids327 patients with DMD (mean age: 11.7, range: NR)Respiratory Health and FunctionExon 44 3’ mutation:Lower FVC, lower FEV1 and lower PEFGlucocorticoidIncreased FVC, FEV1 and PEFSkip 51, Skip 53Decreased FVC, decreased FEV1, decreased PEFSplice site, Skip 8, Skip 44Increased FVCSkip 8, splice siteIncreased FEV1, increased PEFNonsense mutationDecreased FVC and FEV1Dominant G genotype at rs28357094 in the SPP1 promoterReduced FVC and PEFAdditive T genotype at rs1883832 in the CD40 5’ untranslated regionReduced FVC, FEV1 and PEFGlucocorticoid exposure; DMD mutation type; DMD genetic modifiers
Iff et al., 2020 (US) [108]Case control (Level 4)ETEP versus untreated controls283 patients with DMD (mean age: 14.1 years, range: NR)Respiratory Health and FunctionAttenuates respiratory function (indirectly measured)ETEP exposure
McDonald et al., 2020 (*) [109]McDonald et al., 2020 (*) [110]Randomised trial(Level 2)ATA versus external natural history control95 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Respiratory Health and FunctionDelay in respiratory decline as given by FVCATA treatment
Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation
Buyse et al., 2011(BE) [111]Randomised trial(Level 2)IDE and PLC21 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 8–16 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved PEFIDE treatment
Cardiac Health and FunctionImproved peak systolic radial strain in the LV inferolateral wall
Karafilidis et al., 2018(NR) [112]Randomised trial(Level 2)IDE and PLC64 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 10–18 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved PEF and FEV1IDE treatment
Khan et al., 2019 (NR) [113]Khan et al., 2019(NR) [114]Khan et al., 2019 (NR) [115]Randomised trial(Level 2)ETEP and natural history control414 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 7–16 years) or natural history control (mean age: NR, range: 2–28 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionReduced decline in respiratory decline as given by percent predicted FVCETEP treatment
Mendell et al., 2014 (NR) [116]Mendell et al., 2014 (NR) [117]Mendell et al., 2014 (NR) [118]Randomised trial(Level 2)ETEP and PLC12 patients with DMD (median age: 9.7 years, IQR: NR; range: 7–13 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved MEP and FVCETEP treatment
Mendell et al., 2014 (NR) [119]Mendell et al., 2014 (NR) [120]Mendell et al., 2015 (NR) [121]Kaye et al., 2014 (NR) [122]Kaye et al., 2015 (NR) [123]Kaye et al., 2015 (NR) [124]Kaye et al., 2015 (NR) [125]Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 6MWT
Mendell et al., 2021(NR) [126]Mendell et al., 2016 (NR) [127]Mendell et al., 2017 (NR) [128]Mendell et al., 2016 (NR) [129]Mendell et al., 2016 (NR) [130]Randomised controlled trial(Level 2)ETEP compared to external controls12 patients with DMD (mean age: 9.4 years, range: 7–13 years) or no treatment (mean age: 9.6 years, range: 7–13 years)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationETEP treatment
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 6MWT
McDonald et al., 2020(*) [131]Randomised trial(Level 2)Analysis of PLC arm data; DFZ and PDN/PRED115 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 7–14 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 4SC, 6MWT, STS and NSAAGlucocorticoid exposure
Lawrence et al., 2018 (NR) [132]Randomised trial(Level 2)IDE and PLC23 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 10–18 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionImprovement in respiratory function as given by reduced bronchopulmonary adverse eventsIDE treatment
Rummey et al., 2018 (NR) [133]Follow-up study(Level 3)IDE and PLC64 patients with DMD(mean age: 14.3 years, range: 10–18 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved PEFIDE treatment
Kanazawa et al., 1991(JP) [134]Follow-up study(Level 3)cDMD deficit24 patients with DMD (mean age: 14.2 years; range: NR) or non-deficit group: mean age: 14.7 years, range: NR)Respiratory Health and FunctionWorse pulmonary functionDMD mutation type
Hussein et al., 2006 (EG) [135]Case-control(Level 4)PDN/PRED18 patients with DMD (mean age: 5 years, range: NR)Muscle StrengthImprovement in muscle strength as given by MRC scaleGlucocorticoid exposure
Angelini et al., 1994 (IT) [136]RCT(Level 2)DFZ28 patients with DMD treated with DFZ (mean age: 8 years, range: NR) or PLC (mean age: 8 years, range: NR)Muscle StrengthImprovement in muscle strength as given by MRC scale (>1 year of treatment)Glucocorticoid exposure
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved STS
Fenichel et al., 1991 (US) [137]Historically-controlled study(Level 4)PDN/PRED92 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 5–15 years)Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength using an unspecified measure versus controlsImproved more for >0.65mg/kg dose compared to <0.65mg/kgGlucocorticoid exposure
Hu et al., 2015 (CN) [138]RCT(Level 2)PDN/PRED66 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 4–12 years)Muscle StrengthStabilised MRCGlucocorticoid exposure
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 10WRT, 4SC, and STS
Rifai et al., 1995 (US) [139]Case-control(Level 4)PDN/PRED6 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 5–8 years)Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength and mass as given by MMT, QMT, and creatinine excretion)Glucocorticoid exposure
Backman and Henriksson, 1995 (SE) [140]RCT(Level 2)PDN/PRED37 ambulatory(mean age: 8 years, range: 4–11 years) or non-ambulatory(mean age: 13 years, range: 8.0–19 years)patients with DMDMuscle StrengthImproved muscle strength as given by grip strength (strain gauge) and myometric evaluationGlucocorticoid exposure
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionScott functional testing improved during first 3 months of treatment
Upper Extremity FunctionBrooke score improved during first 3 months of treatment
Connolly et al., 2002 (US) [141]Historically controlled cohort study(Level 4)PDN/PRED42 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Muscle StrengthImprovement in grip (Jamar grip meter) and upper extremity strength using a myometryGlucocorticoid exposure
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionSTS, walk/run 9m, and 4SC improved in younger boys versus older boys
Griggs et al., 1993 (CA/US) [142]RCT(Level 2)PDN/PRED107 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 5–15 years)Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength as given by muscle mass increases (creatinine excretion), myometric evaluation and MMTLarger improvement in 075mg/kg versus 0.30mg/kgGlucocorticoid exposure
Mesa et al., 1991 (AR) [143]Non-randomised controlled study(Level 3)DFZ28 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 5–11 years)Muscle StrengthImprovement in muscle strength as given by myometric evaluationGlucocorticoid exposure
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved Scott functional score and STS
Beenakker et al., 2005 (NL) [144]RCT(Level 2)PDN/PRED17 patients with DMD (mean age: 6 years, range: NR)Muscle StrengthIntermittent PDN/PRED improves total muscle force as given by myometric evaluationGlucocorticoid exposure
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionIntermittent PDN/PRED improves 9 metre run/walk and 4SC
Griggs et al., 1991 (CA/US) [145]RCT(Level 2)PDN/PRED99 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength as given by myometric evaluation and MMT.Improvements larger in 075mg/kg versus 0.30mg/kgGlucocorticoid exposure
Lower Extremity and Motor Function9m run/walk test and STS improved in 0.75mg/kg; 4SC improved in both 0.75mg/kg and 0.30mg/kg
Respiratory Health and FunctionImproved FVC versus PLC at both 0.3 and 0.75mg/kg
Merlini et al., 2003 (IT) [146]Case-control study(Level 4)PDN/PRED8 patients with DMD treated with PDN/PRED (mean age: 4 years, range: NR) or no treatment (mean age: 4 years, range: NR)Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength as given by myometric evaluation but only in the leg megascoreGlucocorticoid exposure
Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved STS
Pegoraro et al., 2011 (IT) [147]Historically controlled cohort study(Level 4)SPP1 genotype262 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Muscle StrengthG allele leads to weaker MRC scores and lower grip strengthDMD genetic modifiers
Fenichel et al., 2001 (NR) [148]Randomised trial(Level 2)OXAN vs PLC51 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 5–10 years)Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength score using an unspecified measureOXAN treatment
Fenichel et al., 1997 (US) [149]Case-series(Level 4)OXAN10 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 6–9 years)Muscle StrengthImproved muscle strength as given by manual muscle testingOXAN treatment
Campbell et al., 2020 (*) [150]Meta-analysis (Level 1)ATA and PLC342 patients with DMD (mean age: NR; range: 8.3–9.0)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 6MWD, 4SC and 10WRTATA treatment
Chesshyre et al., 2020 (ENG) [151]Case series(Level 4)Dp140 deletion320 patients with DMD (mean age: MR; range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionLower NSAADMD genetic modifiers
Clemens et al., 2020 (US and CAN) [152]Randomised trial(Level 2)Vitlolarsen (low dose and high dose)16 patients with DMD (mean age: 7.4; range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 10WRT, 6MWT, STS and NSAAVIT treatment
Finkel et al., 2021 (NR) [153]Finkel et al., 2018 (NR) [154]Finkel et al., 2019 (NR) [155]Finkel et al., 2019 (NR) [156]Sweeney et al., 2019 (US) [157]Randomised trial(Level 2)EDASA and PLC31 patients with DMD (mean age: 6.1; range: 4–7)Muscle StrengthImproved lower leg muscle health as given by MRI transverse relaxation time constantEDASA treatment
Parreira et al., 2010 (NR) [158]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED90 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 5–12 years)Muscle StrengthDelay in decline in muscle strength as given by MRC indexGlucocorticoid exposure
Willcocks et al., 2013(NR) [159]Follow-up study(Level 3)DFZ and PDN/PRED145 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 5–14 years)Muscle StrengthDelays decline in muscle as given by MRI and MRS transverse relaxation time constantGlucocorticoid exposure
Goemans et al., 2020 (NR) [160]Case series(Level 4)DFZ316 patients with DMD(median age: 7.9 years, range 4.4–19.4 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionDelay loss of STSGlucocorticoid exposure
Goemans et al., 2020 (NR) [161]Historically controlled study(Level 4)Glucocorticoid, height, weight, BMI371 patients with DMD(mean age: NR; range: 8.81 and 9.36)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionGlucocorticoid, including duration, height, weight and BMI predictive of 4SCGlucocorticoid exposure, height, weight, BMI
Wilton et al., 2013 (US) [162]Randomised trial(Level 2)ETEP and PLCNR patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImprovements in 6MWTETEP treatment
Signorovitch et al., 2017 (*) [163]Signorovitch et al., 2019 (*) [164]Signorovitch et al., 2019 (*) [165]Signorovitch et al., 2019 (*) [166]MA(Level 1)DFZ and PDN/PRED231 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionDFZ improved NSAA, 6MWT, STS, and 4SC compared to PDN/PREDGlucocorticoid exposure
Gupta et al., 2020 (UK) [167]Case seriesLevel 4)Glucocorticoids (drug NR)465 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved NSAA compared to steroid-naïveGlucocorticoid exposure
Goemans et al., 2016 (NR) [168]Goemans et al., 2016(NR) [169]Open-label study(Level 2)DRIS and natural history control12 patients with DMD (mean age: 9.9 years, range: NR) or natural history control (mean age: 9.4 years, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImprovement in 6MWTDRIS treatment
Ricotti et al., 2013 (UK) [170]Ricotti et al., 2012 (UK) [75]Ricotti et al., 2011 (UK) [76]Ricotti et al., 2011 (UK) [77]Case series(Level 4)PDN/PRED334–400 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 3–15 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved NSAA in daily PDN-treated compared to intermittent PDNGlucocorticoid exposure
Schreiber et al., 2018 (FR) [171]Schreiber et al., 2015 (FR) [172]Schreiber et al., 2016 (FR) [173]Case-control study(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED74–76 patients with DMD treated with DFZ and PDN/PRED (mean age: 8 years, range: 6–11 years) or no treatment (mean age: 8 years, range: 6–12 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved muscle function measureGlucocorticoid exposure
Alfano et al., 2019 (US) [174]Non-randomised controlled study(Level 3)DFZ and PDN/PRED148 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 3–16 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 10WRT and 100m walking abilityGlucocorticoid exposure
Goemans et al., 2016 (BE) [175]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED39 patients with DMD (mean age: 9 years, range: 4–16 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 6MWD including duration of use; those with lower 6MWD showed larger declinesGlucocorticoid exposure
Increased height and weight produced larger declines in 6MWDHeight; and weight
Goemans et al., 2018 (BE) [176]Case series(Level 4)DFZ and PDN/PRED81 patients with DMD (mean age: 10 years, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 4SC including duration of useGlucocorticoid exposure
Mazzone et al., 2014 (NR) [177]Non-randomised controlled study(Level 3)DFZ and PDN/PRED96 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 6MWT; baseline 6MWT >350m showed larger improvementsGlucocorticoid exposure
Shieh et al., 2018 (NR) [178]Shieh et al., 2018 (NR) [178]Darras et al., 2018 (NR) [179][NR]Meta-analysis(Level 1)DFZ and PDN/PRED147 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 6MWT favouring DFZGlucocorticoid exposure
Bushby et al., 2014 (*) [180]Mah et al., 2011 (*) [181]McDonald et al., 2013 (*) [182]McDonald et al., 2014 (*) [183]McDonald et al., 2014 (*) [184]Randomised trial(Level 2)ATA174 patients with DMD (median age: 8 years, IQR: 5–20 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionLow dose ATA improved 6MWT including larger improvements in baseline 6MWT <350mATA treatment
McDonald et al., 2017 (*) [185]Randomised trial(Level 2)ATA230 patients with DMD treated with ATA (mean age: 9 years, range: 7–10 years) or PLC (mean age: 9 years, range: 8–10 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 6MWT in 300-400m baseline 6MWT sub-groupATA treatment
McDonald et al., 2019 (*) [186]McDonald et al., 2019 (*) [187]Bushby et al., 2016 (NR) [188]Randomised trial(Level 2)ATA228 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionPreserved NSAAATA treatment
McDonald et al., 2017 (*) [189]McDonald et al., 2018 (*) [190]McDonald et al., 2018 (*) [191]Randomised trial(Level 2)ATA168 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 6MWT, 4SC, and 10WRTATA treatment
Mercuri et al., 2019 (NR) [192]Muntoni et al., 2019 (NR) [193]Non-randomised controlled study(Level 3)ATA versus external natural history control187 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved STS and 4SCATA treatment
Loss of AmbulationLoss of Ambulation
Brogna et al., 2019 (*) [194]Brogna et al., 2019 (*) [195]Case series(Level 4)Skip exons 44, 45, 51, and 5392 patients with DMD (mean age: 8 years, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionExon skipping impacts 6MWTDMD mutation type
Komaki et al., 2020 (JP) [196]Randomised trial(Level 2)TAS-205 and PLC36 patients with DMD (mean age: 8.3, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionHigh dose improves muscle volume indexTAS-205 treatment
Hoffman et al.., 2019 (NR) [197]Randomised non-controlled trial(Level 3)VAM48 patients with DMD(mean age: NR; range: 4–7 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved 10WRT, STS, 6MWTVAM treatment
Smith et al., 2020 (*) [198]Historically controlled study(Level 4)VAM and external natural history control122 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 4–7 years)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved STS, 4SC, NSAA, 10WRTVAM treatment
Koeks et al., 2017 (*) [199]Case series(Level 4)Glucocorticoid exposure5345 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Loss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulationGlucocorticoid exposure; DMD mutation type
ScoliosisReduced scoliosis
Respiratory Health and FunctionReduced need for ventilation
Cardiac Health and FunctionReduced cardiomyopathy
Exon 45 deletionLoss of AmbulationDelay in loss of ambulation
Voit et al., 2014 (*) [200]Randomised trial(Level 2)DRIS and PLC53 patients with DMD (DRIS continuous: mean age: 7.2 years, range: NR and DRIS intermittent: mean age: 7.7 years) or PLC (mean age: 6.9 years, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImproved STS versus PLC for both continuous and intermittent DRIS.6MWD was improved in the continuous regimen versus PLC at week 25DRIS treatment
McDonald et al., 2015 (NR) [201]McDonald et al., 2014 (NR) [202]Randomised trial(Level 2)DRIS535 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: NR)Lower Extremity and Motor FunctionImprovement in 6MWTDRIS treatment
Mayer et al., 2017 (*) [203]Randomised trial(Level 2)IDE and PLC64 patients with DMD (mean age: NR, range: 10–19 years)Respiratory Health and FunctionReduced decline in pulmonary function as given by FVCIDE treatment

Note: Argentina (AR). Australia (AU). Belgium (BE). Canada (CA). China (CN). Denmark (DK). Egypt (EG). France (FR). Germany (DE). Holland (NL). India (IN). Italy (IT). Japan (JP). Korea (KR). Not reported (NR). Sweden (SE). Turkey (TR). United Kingdom (UK). United States of America (US). Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE). Angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB). Ataluren (ATA). Best standard of care (BSC). Beta2-adrenergic receptor (ADRB2). Beta blocker (BB). Body mass index (BMI). Cluster of differentiation 40 (CD40). Deflazacort (DFZ). Drisapersen (DRIS). Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). Dystrophin protein 140 (Dp140). Edasalonexent (EDASA). End systolic volume (ESV). Eplerenone (EPL). Eteplirsen (ETEP). Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). Four Stair Climb (4SC). Idebenone (IDE). Interquartile range (IQR). Knee-ankle-foot-orthoses (KAFOS). Latent transforming growth factor beta-binding protein 4 (LTBP4). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Left ventricular end diastolic dimension (LVEDd). Left ventricular end systolic dimension (LVESd). Left ventricular fractional shortening (LVFS). Left ventricular myocardial performance index (LVMPI). Manual muscle testing (MMT). Maximum expiratory pressure (MEP). Maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP). Maximum voluntary ventilation (MVV). Medical Research Council (MRC). Meridional wall stress (mWS). Meta-analysis (MA). NorthStar Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA). Not applicable (N/A). Optimal Medical Treatment (OMT). Peak cough flow (PCF). Peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR). Peak expiratory flow (PEF). Performance of Upper Limb (PUL). Placebo (PLC). Prednisone (PDN). Prednisolone (PRED). Quantitative muscle testing (QMT). Randomised controlled trial (RCT). Secreted phosphoprotein 1 (SPP1). Single nuclear polymorphisms (SNPs). Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Supine-to-Stand (STS). Ten Metre Walk/Run Test (10WRT). Velocity of circumferential fibre shortening (VCFc). Vamolorone (VAM). Vitlolarsen (VIT).

† OCEBM Level of Evidence.

‡ Indicators with a significant impact on listed disease progression outcome measures.

* Multi-national.

PRISMA diagram of the selection process of the included publications.

Note: † Studies reporting evidence of statistically significant prognostic indicator of disease progression in DMD. Systematic literature reviews (SLRs). Meta-analyses (MAs). Note: Argentina (AR). Australia (AU). Belgium (BE). Canada (CA). China (CN). Denmark (DK). Egypt (EG). France (FR). Germany (DE). Holland (NL). India (IN). Italy (IT). Japan (JP). Korea (KR). Not reported (NR). Sweden (SE). Turkey (TR). United Kingdom (UK). United States of America (US). Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE). Angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB). Ataluren (ATA). Best standard of care (BSC). Beta2-adrenergic receptor (ADRB2). Beta blocker (BB). Body mass index (BMI). Cluster of differentiation 40 (CD40). Deflazacort (DFZ). Drisapersen (DRIS). Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). Dystrophin protein 140 (Dp140). Edasalonexent (EDASA). End systolic volume (ESV). Eplerenone (EPL). Eteplirsen (ETEP). Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). Four Stair Climb (4SC). Idebenone (IDE). Interquartile range (IQR). Knee-ankle-foot-orthoses (KAFOS). Latent transforming growth factor beta-binding protein 4 (LTBP4). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Left ventricular end diastolic dimension (LVEDd). Left ventricular end systolic dimension (LVESd). Left ventricular fractional shortening (LVFS). Left ventricular myocardial performance index (LVMPI). Manual muscle testing (MMT). Maximum expiratory pressure (MEP). Maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP). Maximum voluntary ventilation (MVV). Medical Research Council (MRC). Meridional wall stress (mWS). Meta-analysis (MA). NorthStar Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA). Not applicable (N/A). Optimal Medical Treatment (OMT). Peak cough flow (PCF). Peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR). Peak expiratory flow (PEF). Performance of Upper Limb (PUL). Placebo (PLC). Prednisone (PDN). Prednisolone (PRED). Quantitative muscle testing (QMT). Randomised controlled trial (RCT). Secreted phosphoprotein 1 (SPP1). Single nuclear polymorphisms (SNPs). Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Supine-to-Stand (STS). Ten Metre Walk/Run Test (10WRT). Velocity of circumferential fibre shortening (VCFc). Vamolorone (VAM). Vitlolarsen (VIT). † OCEBM Level of Evidence. ‡ Indicators with a significant impact on listed disease progression outcome measures. * Multi-national. We identified a total of 23 prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD. Endogenous indicators included age at diagnosis, age at onset of symptoms, DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, height, weight and body mass index (BMI). Exogenous indicators included ataluren treatment, ATL1102, cardiac medication, drisapersen, edasalonexent, eteplirsen, glucocorticoid exposure (including age at glucocorticoid treatment initiation, dose, duration of exposure, pharmacological agent, and regimen), idebenone, lower limb surgery, orthoses, oxandrolone, spinal surgery, TAS-205, vamorolone, vitlolarsen, and ventilation support. The evidence for these prognostic indicators across the pre-defined outcome categories is summarised below and illustrated in Fig 2.
Fig 2

Evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD.

Note: Numbers shown in the coloured squares refer to the number of studies reporting of the specific indicator. † Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, beta blockers, and/or diuretics. ‡ Age at treatment initiation, dose, duration of exposure, pharmacological agent, and regimen. Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD).

Evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD.

Note: Numbers shown in the coloured squares refer to the number of studies reporting of the specific indicator. † Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, beta blockers, and/or diuretics. ‡ Age at treatment initiation, dose, duration of exposure, pharmacological agent, and regimen. Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD).

3.1. Cardiac health and function

We identified 29 studies presenting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD measured in terms of cardiac health and function [17–45, 91, 111, 199]. In total, seven prognostic indicators were identified: BMI, cardiac medication, DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, glucocorticoid exposure, idebenone and ventilation support (Table 2). Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, including timing of treatment initiation, have been shown to be significantly associated with improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) [CEBM Evidence Level 2] [29, 32–34, 42–44], and left ventricular end diastolic and systolic dimension (LVEDd/LVESd) [Level 2]; [30, 31, 45] and left ventricular free wall systolic myocardial velocity [Level 2] [30], beta blockers, when administered in combination with ACE inhibitors, with improved LVEF [Level 4] [32-35], left ventricular fractional shortening (LVFS) [Level 2] [31], LVEDd and LVESd [Level 2] [35], left ventricular myocardial performance index (LVMPI) [Level 4] [35], and left ventricular sphericity index [Level 4];[35] beta blockers with reduced heart failure and arrhythmia [Level 3] [37], and improved LVMPI [Level 2]; [30] timing of unspecified cardiac medication with later onset of cardiomyopathy [Level 4]; [38] eplerenone (EPL) with improved left ventricular systolic strain, LVEF, and end systolic volume (ESV) [Level 2]; [36] and ventilation support in combination with cardiac medication with decreased LVEF and left atrium diameter [Level 4] [39]. Glucocorticoid exposure has been shown to be significantly associated with improved LVEF [Level 4] [17–19, 21, 22, 25], LVFS [Level 3] [17–19, 25–27], LVEDd [Level 4] [19, 25, 26], meridional wall stress (mWS) [Level 4] [26], stabilisation of velocity of circumferential fibre shortening (VCFc) [Level 4] [26], reduction in cardiomyopathy [Level 4] [18, 20, 25, 199], and increases in summed rest score [Level 3] [24], as well as increased risk of cardiomyopathy [Level 4] [28], and decline in LVEF [Level 4] [23] linked to duration of glucocorticoid exposure. Idebenone improves peak systolic radial strain in the LV inferolateral wall [Level 2] [111]. BMI is prognostic of cardiomyopathy [Level 4] [41]. Finally, mutations in exons 51 and 52, as well as latent transforming growth factor beta-binding protein 4 (LTBP4), have been shown to be significantly associated with improved or sustained cardiac health and function [Level 4];[21, 22, 35]; mutations in exons 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 with increased risk of cardiomyopathy [Level 4] [35]. and deletions in exon 53 with lower LVEF and higher contracture score compared with deletions not treatable by exon 53 skipping [Level 4] [91]. The ACTN3 null genotype is associated with earlier onset of cardiac dysfunction specifically, lower LV dilation-free rate [Level 4] [40].

3.2. Loss of independent ambulation

We identified 35 studies presenting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD measured in terms of loss of independent ambulation [11, 18–20, 38, 46, 51, 61–66, 68–91, 109, 126–130, 192, 193, 199]. In total, nine prognostic indicators were identified: age at diagnosis, age at onset of symptoms, ataluren treatment, DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, glucocorticoid exposure, eteplirsen treatment, height, and weight (Table 2). Prolonged independent ambulation was found in patients with later onset of symptoms [Level 2]; [83, 84] patients treated with glucocorticoids, including age at treatment initiation, duration of exposure, and pharmacological agent [Level 2]; [11, 18–20, 38, 46, 51, 61–64, 66, 70–82, 88, 199]; ataluren treatment [Level 2] [87, 109, 110, 192, 193]; eteplirsen treatment [Level 2] [126-130]; LTBP4 genotype [Level 2]; [65] lower limb surgery [Level 2] [89, 90] and mutations in exons 44 [Level 2] [11, 67, 73, 86, 88] and exons 3–7 [Level 2]; [11, 88] exon 8 [Level 4] [86, 88]; exon 45 [Level 4] [88, 199]; exon 53 [Level 4] [91];and the minor allele at rs1883832 [Level 4] [85]. Earlier loss of ambulation was found in patients with TG/GG genotype at the rs28357094 secreted phosphoprotein 1 (SPP1) promoter [Level 2]; [63-66] exon 51 skipping and exon 49–50 deletions [Level 4] [88]; and deletions in the dystrophin gene [Level 4] [61]. Older age at diagnosis (>4 years) has been shown to be a predictor of later loss of ambulation [Level 5] [74]. Finally, greater weight and lower height have been shown to predict delayed time to loss of ambulation in patients treated with glucocorticoids [Level 4] [68, 69].

3.3. Lower extremity and motor function

We found 47 studies presenting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD measured in terms of lower extremity and motor function [47, 51, 71, 75–77, 79–82, 87, 92, 96, 101, 119–131, 136, 138, 140, 141, 143–146, 150–152, 160–186, 188–198, 200–202]. In total, twelve prognostic indicators were identified: ataluren treatment, BMI, DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, drisapersen treatment, eteplirsen treatment, glucocorticoid exposure, height, TAS-205 treatment, vamorolone treatment, vitlolarsen treatment, and weight (Table 2). Glucocorticoid treatment, including dose, duration of exposure, and regimen, have been shown to be significantly associated with improvement in motor function as measured using the Scott functional score [Level 2] [140, 143], the Vignos scale [Level 4] [71, 96], muscle function measure [Level 4] [171, 172], improvements in the NorthStar Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA) scale [Level 1] [75–77, 131, 163–167, 170], the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) including duration of glucocorticoid exposure [Level 1] [131, 163–166, 175, 177–179], 10 Meter Walk/Run Test (10WRT) [Level 2] [79–81, 92, 96, 138, 174], 100 metre walk/run test [Level 3] [174], 9 metre walk/run test [Level 2] [47, 141, 144, 145], unspecified walking test [Level 4] [71], Supine-to-Stand (STS) test [Level 1] [47, 51, 71, 82, 92, 96, 101, 131, 136, 138, 141, 143, 145, 146, 160, 163–166], and 4-Stairs Climb Test (4SCT) including duration of exposure [Level 1] [47, 71, 82, 92, 96, 101, 131, 138, 141, 144, 145, 161, 163–166, 176]. Ataluren treatment has been shown to be significantly associated with better performance in timed function tests, including the 4SCT [Level 2] [87, 150, 189–193], the STS test [Level 3] [87, 192, 193], the 10WRT [Level 2] [150, 189–191], the NSAA [Level 2] [186-188], and the 6MWT [Level 2]; [150, 180–185, 189–191] treatment with TAS-205 has been shown to increase muscle volume index [Level 2] [196]; treatment with vitlolarsen associated with improved 10WRT, 6MWT, STS and NSAA [Level 2] [152]; treatment with vamorolone improves 6MWT [Level 3] [197] STS [197, 198], 10WRT [197, 198], 4SCT and NSAA [Level 4] [198]; treatment with drisapersen improves STS and 6MWT [Level 2] [168, 169, 200–202]. Eteplirsen treatment improves 6MWT [Level 2] [119–130, 162]. Greater height and weight have been shown to be significantly associated with decline in the 6MWT [Level 4]; [175] similarly, height, weight BMI and glucocorticoid exposure including duration are predictive of 4SC [Level 4] [161]. Finally, skip exon mutations has been shown to be significantly associated with 6MWT performance [Level 4] and [194, 195] Dp140 deletions associated with lower NSAA scores [Level 4] [151].

3.4. Muscle strength

We found 26 studies presenting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD measured in terms of muscle strength [18, 47, 71, 79, 80, 91, 92, 100, 101, 135–149, 153–159]. In total, five prognostic indicators were identified: DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, edasalonexent, glucocorticoid exposure and oxandrolone (Table 2). Specifically, glucocorticoid treatment, including dose, duration of exposure, and regimen, have been shown to be associated with muscle strength as quantified by the Medical Research Council (MRC) muscle power assessment scale [Level 2] [18, 71, 100, 135, 136, 138, 158], quantitative muscle testing (QMT) [Level 2] [92, 139], muscle mass as given by creatine excretion [Level 2] [137, 139, 142], manual muscle testing (MMT) [Level 2] [92, 139, 142, 145], myometric evaluation [Level 2] [140-146], unspecified muscle strength testing [Level 2] [101, 137], grip and pinch strength [Level 2] [47, 140, 141], Lovett’s test [Level 4]; [79, 80] and transverse relaxation time constant [Level 3] [159]. Edasalonexent improves the transverse relaxation time constant [Level 2] [153-157]. Oxandrolone improves muscle strength as given by MMT [Level 4] [149] and an unspecified measure [Level 2] [148]. Finally, GT/GG genotypes at the rs28357094 SPP1 promoter have been shown to be significantly associated with lower composite MRC scores and grip strength compared with the TT genotype [Level 4] [147]. and exon 53 deletions with lower pinch strength compared to all mutations not treatable by exon 53 skipping [Level 4] [91].

3.5. Respiratory health and function

We identified 35 studies presenting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD measured in terms of respiratory health and function [17–19, 21, 22, 28, 38, 47, 71, 77, 82, 92, 94–118, 132–134, 145, 199, 203]. In total, eight prognostic indicators were identified: ataluren treatment, DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, eteplirsen treatment, glucocorticoid exposure, idebenone treatment, ventilation support and weight (Table 2). Specifically, ataluren treatment has been shown to be significantly associated with improved forced vital capacity (FVC) [Level 2]; [103, 104, 109, 110] glucocorticoid treatment, including dose, duration of exposure, and regimen, with improved maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP) [Level 2] [92, 95, 96], maximum expiratory pressure (MEP) [Level 4] [94, 95], peak cough flow (PCF) [Level 4]; [94, 95] FVC [Level 2]; [17, 18, 21, 22, 38, 47, 71, 77, 82, 96–99, 101, 145] forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) [Level 2] [96, 107], maximum voluntary ventilation (MVV) [Level 2], [92, 101, 102], FVC [Level 4] [107], reduced need for ventilation [Level 4] [199] and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) [Level 3] [96, 98–100, 107] and pulmonary function preservation [Level 4] [19]. Duration of glucocorticoid exposure has also been linked to declining FVC levels [Level 4] [28]. Eteplirsen has been shown to be associated with an attenuation in respiratory function [Level 4] [108, 118] and reduced decline in FVC [Level 2] [113-117] and MEP [Level 2] [116, 117]; and idebenone reduces the decline in respiratory function as given by FVC [Level 2] [203], FEV1 [Level 2] [112] and PEF [Level 2] [111, 112, 133] as well as reducing bronchopulmonary adverse events [Level 2] [132]. Weight has been shown to be a significant predictor of need for full-time ventilation support [Level 4] [105]. Ventilation support has been shown to reduce the rate of decline of FVC [Level 4] [106]. Finally, Gly16 beta2-adrenergic receptor (ADRB2) polymorphism has been shown to be significantly associated with increased risk of requiring nocturnal ventilation support (compared with the Arg16 polymorphism) [Level 4] [105]; dystrophin protein 140 (Dp140)-related mutations with lower FVC [Level 4] [21, 22]; mutations in exon 44 with lower FVC, FEV1 and PEF [Level 4] [107]; skip 51 and 53 mutations with decreased FEV1, PEF and FVC [Level 4] [107]; splice site, skip 8 and skip 44 with increased FVC [Level 4] [107]; skip 8 and splice site mutations with increased FEV1 and increased PEF [Level 4] [107]; nonsense mutation with decreased FEV1 and FVC [Level 4] [107]; dominant G genotype at rs28357094 in the SPP1 promoter with reduced FVC and PEF [Level 4] [107]; additive T genotype at rs1883832 in the CD40 5’ untranslated region with reduced FVC, FEV1 and PEF [Level 4] [107];mutations in exon 8 with improved PEF [Level 4]; [21, 22]; cDMD deficit with worsened respiratory function [Level 3] [134]; and SPP1 and cluster of differentiation 40 (CD40) polymorphisms with reduced FVC and PEF, respectively [Level 4] [21, 22] with both mutations associated with NIV initiation [Level 4] [107].

3.6. Scoliosis

We identified 7 studies presenting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD measured in terms of risk of scoliosis [18, 46–50, 199]. In total, two prognostic indicators were identified: glucocorticoid exposure, and orthoses (Table 2). Specifically, glucocorticoid treatment, including duration of exposure, have been shown to significantly reduce the risk of developing scoliosis, including the degree of scoliosis and the need for spinal surgery [Level 3] [18, 46–50, 199]. Time in orthoses has been shown to be significantly related to scoliosis severity [Level 4] [50].

3.7. Survival

We identified 13 studies presenting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD measured in terms of survival [25, 42, 43, 49, 51–60]. In total, five prognostic indicators were identified: cardiac medication, glucocorticoid exposure, left ventricular assist devices, spinal surgery, and ventilation support (Table 2). Specifically, prolonged survival was found in patients treated with ACE inhibitors [Level 2] [42, 43] ACE inhibitors in combination with beta blockers, including timing of treatment initiation [Level 4]; [52] in patients treated with glucocorticoids (including duration of exposure) [Level 2]; [25, 49, 51] in patients receiving ventilation support [Level 4]; [53-59] and in those undergoing spinal surgery in combination with ventilation support [Level 4] [55].; and in those implanted with left ventricular assist devices in combination with cardiac medication [Level 4] [60].

3.8. Upper extremity function

We identified 5 studies presenting evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD measured in terms of upper extremity function [51, 92, 93, 96, 140]. In total, two prognostic indicators were identified: glucocorticoid exposure (including pharmacological agent) and ATL1102 treatment (Table 2). Glucocorticoid treatment has been shown to significantly retain hand-to-mouth function as measured using the Brooke score [Level 2]; [51, 92, 96, 140] and deflazacort (DFZ) exposure significantly delays loss of hand-to-mouth function compared to prednisone (PDN) [Level 2] [51]. Treatment with ATL1102 improves upper limb function in non-ambulant boys as given by performance of upper limb (PUL) scores [Level 2] [93].

4. Discussion

In many disease areas, including DMD, RCTs are commonly unavailable, resulting in the need to indirectly compare treatment effects, for example, by pooling individual patient-level data from multiple sources. However, to derive reliable estimates, it is necessary to ensure that the samples considered are comparable with respect to factors significantly affecting the clinical progression of the disease. To help inform such analyses, the objective of this study was to review and synthesise the published evidence of prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD. From our literature search, we identified 23 factors significantly affecting disease progression outcomes in DMD, namely age at diagnosis, age at onset of symptoms, ataluren treatment, ATL1102, BMI, cardiac medication, DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, drisapersen, edasalonexent, eteplirsen, glucocorticoid exposure, height, idebenone, lower limb surgery, orthoses, oxandrolone, spinal surgery, TAS-205, vamorolone, vitlolarsen, ventilation support, and weight. Of these, two endogenous and two exogenous core prognostic indicators were designated, each supported by a high level of clinical evidence. The most commonly examined prognostic indicator identified in the literature related to treatment with glucocorticoids–the cornerstone of the current pharmacological management of DMD. This core exogenous factor was found to significantly impact a wide range of disease progression outcomes, including loss of independent ambulation, lower extremity and motor function, muscle strength, respiratory health and function, survival, and upper extremity function (high level of evidence); cardiac health and function (moderate level of evidence); and possibly risk of developing scoliosis (low level of evidence). The body of evidence, spanning a total of 73 individual studies, encompassed various commonly reported features of glucocorticoid therapy, such as age at treatment initiation, dose, duration of exposure, pharmacological agent, and regimen. The second exogenous core prognostic indicator of disease progression in DMD was cardiac medication, supported by data from a total of 13 studies of varying levels of evidence (Fig 2). As expected, this indicator only concerned cardiac health and function (with the exception of a single study of low evidence level showing an impact on survival). Even so, bearing in mind that cardiomyopathy has emerged as one of the leading causes of death in the aging DMD population in the presence of the routine use of mechanical ventilation support [12], the significance of this indicator should not be underestimated, in particular when comparing samples encompassing patients residing in more advanced stages of the disease. The two endogenous core prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD identified in our review were DMD genetic modifiers and DMD mutation type. Although more research is needed to quantify the impact of specific modifiers and mutations, emerging data show that these genetic aspects may play a non-trivial role in the overall progression of the disease. These findings underscore the importance of collecting genetic data from DMD patients as part of studies and patient registries. Our study is subject to three specific limitations. First, our review did not cover grey literature, which means that evidence for some indicators of disease progression in DMD might have not been fully identified. However, given the comprehensive scope of our search and the limited body of clinical evidence disseminated in non-indexed journals, the impact of this limitation is expected to be negligible (in particular in terms of detecting novel prognostic indicators currently not included in our synthesis). Second, for interpretation of results, it is important to keep in mind that our study did not seek to assess the efficacy or effectiveness of current disease interventions, nor the sensitivity of specific indicators, but rather identify factors that have been shown to significantly alter the clinical progression of DMD (irrespective of magnitude). Although we only considered statistically significant factors, this means that it is not possible to discern the relative clinical importance, or relevance, of included indicators. Finally, the fact that we only reported statistically significant and not also non-significant results means that we were more likely to accept false positive than false negative conclusions of specific indicators. That being said, collating and synthesizing also non-significant results, of which a non-trivial proportion (β) would be expected to be false, were outside the scope of this review. In conclusion, we identified a total of 23 prognostic indicators of disease progression in DMD, of which cardiac medication, DMD genetic modifiers, DMD mutation type, and glucocorticoid exposure were designated core indicators significantly affecting a wide range of clinical outcomes. Our up-to-date summary of prognostic indicators in DMD should be helpful to inform the design of comparative analyses and future data collection initiatives in this patient population.

PRISMA 2009 checklist.

(PDF) Click here for additional data file.

Search strings.

(DOCX) Click here for additional data file.
  124 in total

1.  Disease-modifying effects of edasalonexent, an NF-κB inhibitor, in young boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: Results of the MoveDMD phase 2 and open label extension trial.

Authors:  Richard S Finkel; Erika Finanger; Krista Vandenborne; H Lee Sweeney; Gihan Tennekoon; Perry B Shieh; Rebecca Willcocks; Glenn Walter; William D Rooney; Sean C Forbes; William T Triplett; Sabrina W Yum; Maria Mancini; James MacDougall; Angelika Fretzen; Pradeep Bista; Andrew Nichols; Joanne M Donovan
Journal:  Neuromuscul Disord       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 4.296

2.  Prednisolone in Duchenne muscular dystrophy with imminent loss of ambulation.

Authors:  Sunil Pradhan; Debabrata Ghosh; Niraj Kumar Srivastava; Ashok Kumar; Balraj Mittal; Chandra Mani Pandey; Uttam Singh
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2006-06-19       Impact factor: 4.849

3.  Prednisone in Duchenne dystrophy. A randomized, controlled trial defining the time course and dose response. Clinical Investigation of Duchenne Dystrophy Group.

Authors:  R C Griggs; R T Moxley; J R Mendell; G M Fenichel; M H Brooke; A Pestronk; J P Miller
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  1991-04

4.  Associations between timing of corticosteroid treatment initiation and clinical outcomes in Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Authors:  Sunkyung Kim; Yong Zhu; Paul A Romitti; Deborah J Fox; Daniel W Sheehan; Rodolfo Valdez; Dennis Matthews; Brent J Barber
Journal:  Neuromuscul Disord       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 4.296

5.  Long-Term Steroid Therapy in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy-Positive Results versus Side Effects.

Authors:  U Schara; W Mortier
Journal:  J Clin Neuromuscul Dis       Date:  2001-06

6.  Early prednisone treatment in Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Authors:  Luciano Merlini; Alessandro Cicognani; Elisabetta Malaspina; Monia Gennari; Saverio Gnudi; Beril Talim; Emilio Franzoni
Journal:  Muscle Nerve       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.217

7.  Low-dose prednisolone treatment in Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy.

Authors:  E Bäckman; K G Henriksson
Journal:  Neuromuscul Disord       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.296

8.  The effect of enalapril and carvedilol on left ventricular dysfunction in middle childhood and adolescent patients with muscular dystrophy.

Authors:  Hye Won Kwon; Bo Sang Kwon; Gi Beom Kim; Jong Hee Chae; June Dong Park; Eun Jung Bae; Chung Il Noh
Journal:  Korean Circ J       Date:  2012-03-26       Impact factor: 3.243

9.  Vamorolone trial in Duchenne muscular dystrophy shows dose-related improvement of muscle function.

Authors:  Eric P Hoffman; Benjamin D Schwartz; Laurel J Mengle-Gaw; Edward C Smith; Diana Castro; Jean K Mah; Craig M McDonald; Nancy L Kuntz; Richard S Finkel; Michela Guglieri; Katharine Bushby; Mar Tulinius; Yoram Nevo; Monique M Ryan; Richard Webster; Andrea L Smith; Lauren P Morgenroth; Adrienne Arrieta; Maya Shimony; Catherine Siener; Mark Jaros; Phil Shale; John M McCall; Kanneboyina Nagaraju; John van den Anker; Laurie S Conklin; Avital Cnaan; Heather Gordish-Dressman; Jesse M Damsker; Paula R Clemens
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 9.910

10.  Comparison of Long-term Ambulatory Function in Patients with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Treated with Eteplirsen and Matched Natural History Controls.

Authors:  Jerry R Mendell; Navid Khan; Nanshi Sha; Helen Eliopoulos; Craig M McDonald; Nathalie Goemans; Eugenio Mercuri; Linda P Lowes; Lindsay N Alfano
Journal:  J Neuromuscul Dis       Date:  2021
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.