Alzheimer's Disease THErapy With NEuroaid (ATHENE): A Randomized Double-Blind Delayed-Start Trial

ObjectivesPreclinical and clinical studies indicate a role for MLC901 (NeuroAiD II) in Alzheimer's disease (AD). The primary aim was to investigate its safety as add-on therapy to standard treatment and the secondary aims its effect on cognition and slowing disease progression.DesignRandomized double-blind placebo-controlled delayed-start study.Setting and ParticipantPatients with mild to moderate probable AD by NINCDS-ADRDA criteria, stable on acetylcholinesterase inhibitors or memantine (n = 125), were randomized to receive MLC901 (early starters) or placebo (delayed starters) for 6 months, followed by a further 6 months when all patients received MLC901, in a delayed-start design (clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03038035).MethodsThe primary outcome measure was occurrence of serious adverse events (SAEs) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) and other assessment scales.ResultsThere was no significant difference in the risk of SAEs between early and delayed starters at month (M) 6 (22.6% vs 27.0%, risk difference ?4.4%, 90% CI –16.9% to 8.3%). Similarly, there was no significant difference in the risk of adverse events and the occurrence of stroke or vascular events between early and delayed starters throughout the 12-month study period. Early starters did not differ significantly on ADAS-Cog from delayed starters at M6 [mean difference (MD) ?1.0, 95% CI –3.3 to 1.3] and M12 (MD –2.35, 95% CI –5.45 to 0.74) on intention-to-treat analysis. Other cognitive assessment scales did not show significant differences.Conclusions and ImplicationsThis study of 125 persons with dementia found no evidence of a significant increase in adverse events between MLC901 and placebo, thus providing support for further studies on both efficacy and safety. Analyses suggest the potential of MLC901 in slowing down AD progression, but this requires further confirmation in larger and longer studies using biomarkers for AD.     

Future directions in managing aniridia-associated keratopathy

Congenital aniridia is a panocular disorder that is typically characterized by iris hypoplasia and aniridia-associated keratopathy (AAK). AAK results in the progressive loss of corneal transparency and thereby loss of vision. Currently, there is no approved therapy to delay or prevent its progression, and clinical management is challenging because of phenotypic variability and high risk of complications after interventions; however, new insights into the molecular pathogenesis of AAK may help improve its management. Here, we review the current understanding about the pathogenesis and management of AAK. We highlight the biological mechanisms involved in AAK development with the aim to develop future treatment options, including surgical, pharmacological, cell therapies, and gene therapies.     

What information can we gain from performing adaptive radiotherapy of head and neck cancer patients from the past 10 years?

The aim of the review was to present the current literature status about replanning regarding anatomical and dosimetric changes in the target and OARs in the head and neck region during radiotherapy, to discuss and to analyze factors influencing the decision for adaptive radiotherapy of head and neck cancer patients. Significant progress has been made in head and neck patients’ evaluation and qualification for adapted radiotherapy over the past ten years. Many factors leading to anatomical and dosimetric changes during treatment have been identified. Based on the literature, the most common factors triggering re-plan are weight loss, tumor and nodal changes, and parotid glands shrinkage. The fluctuations in dose distribution in the clinical area are significant predictive factors for patients’ quality of life and the possibility of recovery. It has been shown that re-planning influence clinical outcomes: local control, disease free survival and overall survival. Regarding literature studies, it seems that adaptive radiotherapy would be the most beneficial for tumors of immense volume or those in the nearest proximity of the OARs. All researchers agree that the timing of re-planning is a crucial challenge, and there are still no clear consensus guidelines for time or criteria of re-planning. Nowadays, thanks to significant technological progress, the decision is mostly made based on observation and supported with IGRT verification. Although further research is still needed, adaptive strategies are evolving and now became the state of the art of modern radiotherapy.