The NP001 formulation of sodium chlorite acts through a plausible mechanism and preliminary data suggest that it is safe and may slow ALS progression in some PALS. The WF10 formulation of SC appears to act through this same mechanism. Although WF10 is available for off-label use, it is very expensive, may have more side-effects than NP001, and at this time has only scant anecdotal evidence for efficacy in PALS. ALSUntangled supports further carefully monitored studies of NP001 and WF10 in PALS. In contrast, oral sodium chlorite has potentially dangerous and toxic side-effects may hasten disease progression, and is not clearly absorbed from the gut. We do not recommend further use of oral sodium chlorite unless it can at least be shown to be safe and to act on mechanisms in humans that are relevant to ALS.
Risks (harms that occurred on this treatment)
Proprionyl-L-Carnitine
There are good theoretical mechanisms for carnitines, some pre-clinical evidence for LC and ALCAR, and a single clinical trial that suggested ALCAR could slow disease progression in PALS. All three carnitines appear to be well-tolerated, generally safe and inexpensive. We believe that there is a need for future clinical trials of carnitines in PALS to further elucidate their efficacy. Until there is further data, we cannot endorse any of these supplements as a definite way to slow ALS progression; however, oral ALCAR at 1000mg three times daily (3000 mg total daily dose) appears to be a theoretically promising supplement available for PALS whom would like to self-experiment.
Acetyl-L-Carnitine
There are good theoretical mechanisms for carnitines, some pre-clinical evidence for LC and ALCAR, and a single clinical trial that suggested ALCAR could slow disease progression in PALS. All three carnitines appear to be well-tolerated, generally safe, and inexpensive. We believe that there is a need for future clinical trials of carnitines in PALS to further elucidate their efficacy. Until there is further data, we cannot endorse any of these supplements as a definite way to slow ALS progression; however, oral ALCAR at 1000mg three times daily (3000 mg total daily dose) appears to be a theoretically promising supplement available for PALS whom would like to self-experiment.
L-Carnitine
There are good theoretical mechanisms for carnitines, some pre-clinical evidence for
LC and ALCAR, and a single clinical trial that suggested ALCAR could slow disease progression in PALS. All three carnitines appear to be well-tolerated, generally safe, and inexpensive. We believe that there is a need for future clinical trials of carnitines in PALS to further elucidate their efficacy. Until there is further data, we cannot endorse any of these supplements as a definite way to slow ALS progression; however, oral ALCAR at 1000mg three times daily (3000 mg total daily dose) appears to be a theoretically promising supplement available for PALS whom would like to self-experiment.
Glutathione
As an ALS treatment, glutathione and cysteine-containing supplements that increase glutathione appear reasonably safe, and they have a plausible mechanism, positive preclinical data and 2 interesting case reports. Unfortunately small clinical trials of glutathione itself and of acetylcysteine showed no significant benefit. Given these negative clinical trials, we do not advise PALS to take glutathione or cysteine-containing supplements for their ALS at this time.
Click here to download the complete review.
Acuscope
Acuscope appears reasonably safe, but it is not clear that it has a mechanism of action that would be useful to PALS. One person with PLS experienced slightly slower ALSFRS-R measurements while using Acuscope than she did before starting it, but a PALS had slightly faster ALSFRS-R progression during treatment. Since the natural history of motor neuron disease progression can vary spontaneously, it is not clear that either of these slight changes in progression were related to the treatment. Given these limitations, at this time we cannot endorse the use of Acuscope to slow, stop or reverse ALS progression.
Click here to download the complete review.
Protandim
Protandim appears reasonably safe and inexpensive, has a promising mechanism by which it could help ALS, and there is a patient with a validated ALS diagnosis whose ALSFRS-R score improved on it. There are significant problems with the data described, including small study sample sizes, failure to demonstrate that Protandim increases Nrf2 in humans, failure to establish an optimal dose, and potential conflicts of interest among several of the key individuals involved. Nonetheless, in our opinion, further study of Protandim in ALS appears warranted.
Declaration of interest: ALSUntangled is sponsored by the ALS Association and the Motor Neurone Disease Association.
Click here to download the complete review.
Methylcobalamin
MeCbl has promising mechanisms and positive preclinical data from two different ALS models. Unfortunately, the anecdotal data we found did not identify any clear specific benefit, and the best of three clinical trials was unable to show an overall difference in ALSFRS-R progression or survival between PALS treated with MeCbl and those treated with placebo (26). A sub-group of patients with very specific pretreatment progression rates of 1–3 ALSFRS-R points over 12 weeks, and very early disease (less than 12 months from symptom onset) may have had benefit (26). This finding needs to be replicated, especially since an earlier study suggested patients with longer disease duration were more likely to benefit (20). We would like to see a full traditional sub-group analysis (28) carried out on the data from the third trial (26). This sub-group analysis could then be used to design inclusion criteria for a new phase III trial comparing MeCbl 50 mg twice a week IM to placebo. The new trial could measure serum B12 and homocysteine, and have pre-planned sub-group analyses that are both logical and practical. While we wait for this, PALS who wish to try MeCbl are reminded that the above studies used very high, injected doses, which appear to be available only by prescription. Lower over-the-counter doses administered orally have not been studied. It is well established that over-the-counter oral supplements may be of poor and inconsistent quality (32). Some over-the-counter oral vitamin B supplements contain not only B12 but also B6, which in large quantities can be harmful to the nervous system (33).