France: A comparative effectiveness study in children with spinal muscular atrophy type 1 (SMA1) has found that gene therapy was associated with a lower incidence of unplanned clinical requirements (UCR) and fewer supportive care needs compared with nusinersen. The findings support gene therapy as a potentially preferable treatment option, although larger studies are needed to confirm these exploratory results and guide treatment decisions.

The study was published in JAMA Network Open by Juliette Ropars, Reference Center for Neuromuscular Disorders, Pediatric Department, CHU Brest, Brest, France, and colleagues.
SMA1 is a severe genetic neuromuscular disorder characterised by progressive muscle weakness and difficulties with movement, breathing and swallowing. Although disease-modifying treatments have improved outcomes, comparative evidence is needed to help clinicians determine the most appropriate first-line therapy for affected children.
To investigate this, researchers compared nusinersen with onasemnogene abeparvovec, a gene therapy, using data from the French National SMA Registry collected between September 2016 and July 2024.
The analysis included children with genetically confirmed SMA1 who began either treatment within six months of diagnosis and had at least two years of follow-up. The researchers matched 24 children into 12 pairs based on age, baseline motor function, respiratory status, and nutritional status at treatment initiation.
The primary outcomes included respiratory and nutritional support requirements, motor function, and UCR, a composite measure encompassing death, treatment change or additional therapy due to inadequate response, initiation of feeding support, or failure to achieve independent sitting.
The analysis revealed the following findings:
  • Unplanned clinical requirements: UCR occurred in 8 of 12 children (67%) receiving nusinersen, compared with 3 of 12 (25%) receiving gene therapy.
  • Nutritional support: At two years, feeding support was required by 1 of 11 surviving children (9%) in the gene therapy group, compared with 5 of 10 (50%) receiving nusinersen.
  • Respiratory support: Nocturnal ventilation was needed by 5 of 11 surviving children (45%) treated with gene therapy, compared with 8 of 10 (80%) receiving nusinersen.
  • Motor function: Improvements in motor function were comparable between the groups, with no statistically significant difference in the change in Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Infant Test of Neuromuscular Disorders (CHOP-INTEND) scores.
  • Mortality: Three children died within the first year of treatment: one (8%) in the gene therapy group and two (17%) in the nusinersen group.
The findings suggest that gene therapy was associated with lower respiratory and nutritional support needs in children with symptomatic SMA1, while motor outcomes were comparable between treatments.
The study was limited by its small sample size, observational design, potential residual confounding, and differences in treatment periods. The findings may not apply to presymptomatic infants or other SMA subtypes.
The researchers concluded that gene therapy may reduce supportive care needs and UCR compared with nusinersen, but larger studies are needed to confirm these findings and guide treatment decisions.
Reference:
Ropars J, Cances C, Garcia-Uzquiano R, et al. Comparative Clinical Outcomes of Nusinersen and Gene Therapy in Spinal Muscular Atrophy Type 1. JAMA Netw Open. 2025;8(10):e2536348. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.36348


Tags:    
Article Source : JAMA Network Open

Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.

NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.

Medha Baranwal

Medha Baranwal holds a Bachelor’s degree in Biomedical Sciences from the University of Delhi and a Master’s degree in Biotechnology from Amity University. Since May 2018, she has been contributing to Medical Dialogues, writing and editing medical news articles that translate complex research into clear, accessible information for healthcare professionals.

Comments Policy
Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .