↓ Skip to main content

Long-term efficacy and safety of sapropterin in patients who initiated sapropterin at < 4 years of age with phenylketonuria: results of the 3-year extension of the SPARK open-label, multicentre…

Overview of attention for article published in Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, August 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Long-term efficacy and safety of sapropterin in patients who initiated sapropterin at < 4 years of age with phenylketonuria: results of the 3-year extension of the SPARK open-label, multicentre, randomised phase IIIb trial
Published in
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, August 2021
DOI 10.1186/s13023-021-01968-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ania C. Muntau, Alberto Burlina, François Eyskens, Peter Freisinger, Vincenzo Leuzzi, Hatice Serap Sivri, Gwendolyn Gramer, Renata Pazdírková, Maureen Cleary, Amelia S. Lotz-Havla, Paul Lane, Ignacio Alvarez, Frank Rutsch

Abstract

During the initial 26-week SPARK (Safety Paediatric efficAcy phaRmacokinetic with Kuvan®) study, addition of sapropterin dihydrochloride (Kuvan®; a synthetic formulation of the natural cofactor for phenylalanine hydroxylase, tetrahydrobiopterin; BH4), to a phenylalanine (Phe)-restricted diet, led to a significant improvement in Phe tolerance versus a Phe-restricted diet alone in patients aged 0-4 years with BH4-responsive phenylketonuria (PKU) or mild hyperphenylalaninaemia (HPA). Based on these results, the approved indication for sapropterin in Europe was expanded to include patients < 4 years of age. Herein, we present results of the SPARK extension study (NCT01376908), evaluating the long-term safety, dietary Phe tolerance, blood Phe concentrations and neurodevelopmental outcomes in patients < 4 years of age at randomisation, over an additional 36 months of treatment with sapropterin. All 51 patients who completed the 26-week SPARK study period entered the extension period. Patients who were previously treated with a Phe-restricted diet only ('sapropterin extension' group; n = 26), were initiated on sapropterin at 10 mg/kg/day, which could be increased up to 20 mg/kg/day. Patients previously treated with sapropterin plus Phe-restricted diet, remained on this regimen in the extension period ('sapropterin continuous' group; n = 25). Dietary Phe tolerance increased significantly at the end of the study versus baseline (week 0), by 38.7 mg/kg/day in the 'sapropterin continuous' group (95% CI 28.9, 48.6; p < 0.0001). In the 'sapropterin extension' group, a less pronounced effect was observed, with significant differences versus baseline (week 27) only observed between months 9 and 21; dietary Phe tolerance at the end of study increased by 5.5 mg/kg/day versus baseline (95% CI - 2.8, 13.8; p = 0.1929). Patients in both groups had normal neuromotor development and growth parameters. Long-term treatment with sapropterin plus a Phe-restricted diet in patients who initiated sapropterin at < 4 years of age with BH4-responsive PKU or mild HPA maintained improvements in dietary Phe tolerance over 3.5 years. These results continue to support the favourable risk/benefit profile for sapropterin in paediatric patients (< 4 years of age) with BH4-responsive PKU. Frequent monitoring of blood Phe levels and careful titration of dietary Phe intake to ensure adequate levels of protein intake is necessary to optimise the benefits of sapropterin treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01376908. Registered 17 June 2011, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01376908 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Researcher 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 15 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Unspecified 2 7%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 16 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2021.
All research outputs
#13,510,424
of 23,310,485 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#1,375
of 2,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,978
of 432,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#35
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,310,485 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,673 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 432,227 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.