↓ Skip to main content

Mavoglurant in adolescents with fragile X syndrome: analysis of Clinical Global Impression-Improvement source data from a double-blind therapeutic study followed by an open-label, long-term extension…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Mavoglurant in adolescents with fragile X syndrome: analysis of Clinical Global Impression-Improvement source data from a double-blind therapeutic study followed by an open-label, long-term extension study
Published in
Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s11689-015-9134-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donald B. Bailey, Elizabeth Berry-Kravis, Anne Wheeler, Melissa Raspa, Florence Merrien, Javier Ricart, Barbara Koumaras, Gerd Rosenkranz, Mark Tomlinson, Florian von Raison, George Apostol

Abstract

A phase II randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study and subsequent open-label extension study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of mavoglurant (AFQ056), a selective metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype-5 antagonist, in treating behavioral symptoms in adolescent patients with fragile X syndrome (FXS). A novel method was applied to analyze changes in symptom domains in patients with FXS using the narratives associated with the clinician-rated Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scale. In the core study, patients were randomized to receive mavoglurant (25, 50, or 100 mg BID) or placebo over 12 weeks. In the extension, patients received 100 mg BID mavoglurant (or the highest tolerated dose) for up to 32 months. Global improvement, as a measure of treatment response, was assessed using the CGI-I scale. Investigators assigning CGI-I scores of 1 (very much improved), 2 (much improved), 6 (much worse), or 7 (very much worse) were provided a standard narrative template to collect further information about the changes observed in patients. Investigator feedback was coded and clustered into categories of improvement or worsening to identify potential areas of improvement with mavoglurant. Treatment effect in each category was characterized using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. A total of 134 and 103 patients had reached 2 weeks or more of core and extension study treatment, respectively, by the pre-assigned cutoff date for investigator feedback. In the core study, 34 CGI-I scores of 1 or 2 were reported in 28 patients; one patient scored 6. Analysis of the CGI-I narratives did not indicate greater treatment response in patients receiving mavoglurant compared with placebo in any specific improvement domain. There were 54 CGI-I scores of 1 or 2 in 47 patients in the extension study. The most frequently reported categories of improvement were behavior and mood (79.3 and 76.6 % in core and extension studies, respectively), engagement (75.9 and 78.7 %), and communication (69.0 and 61.7 %). A method was established to capture and categorize FXS symptoms using CGI-I narratives. Although this method did not show benefit of drug over placebo, narratives from investigators were mostly based on parental report and thus do not represent a completely objective alternative assessment. The studies described are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with clinical trial identifier numbers NCT01357239 and NCT01433354.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 14 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 11 19%
Psychology 8 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 12 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 February 2016.
All research outputs
#20,305,223
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#451
of 476 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#327,431
of 390,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 476 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 390,205 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.