ALS Reversals

Some times people with ALS get better

Patient trials

Inosine

by

Inosine is a low-cost supplement that increases the levels of urate, a naturally occurring antioxidant. With appropriate blood and urine monitoring, it appears reasonably safe. Epidemiologic data suggest that high urate levels may be associated with improved survival in ALS, which prompted preclinical studies and clinical trials of inosine. These are still ongoing and will help determine whether inosine could be a useful treatment for ALS.‌

Declaration of interest: ALSUntangled is sponsored by the ALS Association and the Motor Neurone Disease Association.

Click here to download the complete review.

Accilion

by

In our opinion, Accilion does not have a mechanism that is plausible for the treatment of ALS. There is one patient with a confirmed diagnosis of slowly progressive ALS who had modest objective improvements in motor function while using Accilion. However, improvements such as these have been described before, even in patients taking a placebo (32). We believe improvements in PALS are important to study, but they may have multiple explanations and thus are not proof of treatment efficacy (32). At this time we do not recommend the use of Accilion for ALS.‌‌‌‌

Declaration of interest: ALSUntangled is sponsored by the ALS Association and the Motor Neurone Disease Association.

Click here to download the complete review.

GM604

by

At this time ALSUntangled finds no independently verifiable data supporting the efficacy or even the safety of GM604 in patients with ALS. We believe that independent peer review and replication are fundamentals of good science (36,37). Accordingly, we share the FDA’s April 2015 opinion that the data on GM604 in ALS should be released now for

independent peer review (38). If these preliminary data are confirmed to be positive, statistics on the false-positive rate of small trials (29,30) and consensus ALS trial guidelines (35) dictate that they be replicated in a larger, longer duration study before GM604 is deemed effective or even safe for patients with ALS.‌‌

ALSUntangled generally supports the use of expanded access programs during ALS drug development. We believe that these should be reserved for treatments that have at least some independently verifiable safety data. In our opinion, that is not the case with GM604, so we feel that expanded access is premature at this time. When we can independently verify safety data, we hope to see a GM604 group expanded access program that has transparent entry criteria, systematic objective outcome measures, full disclosure of results, and, as suggested by the FDA, allows for a sponsor’s cost recovery but not for profit (39).‌‌‌

Click here to download the complete review.

Precision Stem Cell

by

At ALSUntangled our goal is to provide guidance on the mechanism, pre-clinical data, anecdotal evidence, trials and risks of various alternative treatment options. Our goal is not to challenge the rights of PALS to pursue these options. Along these lines, MSC transplants in general have a promising mechanism, good pre-clinical data in ALS models and appear reasonably safe when performed with approved standardized protocols, proper oversight, and monitoring. However, the specific protocols used at PSC for PALS are poorly detailed, appear variable in terms of the sources of MSCs being used, the ways these are being modified and the places where these are being inserted, have no provision for confirming the material being inserted, and have only subjective and usually brief improvements associated with them. ALSUntangled strongly supports further study of MSC in PALS, but only with transparent, reproducible protocols that include confirmation of transplanted material and objective outcome measures. At this time, it does not appear to us that PSC is meeting these criteria.

Gluten-Free Diet

by

Theoretically, gluten-induced autoimmunity could trigger ALS. However, the data supporting this link are weak, consisting of two association studies and a single case-report. Further studies are needed to confirm the relationship between GRDs and ALS, and the utility of the GFD in patients with both conditions. In spite of the fact that GFD is reasonably safe, it is a complex undertaking and is more expensive than a standard diet. While we wait for better data, it would be reasonable to screen PALS who have GI symptoms, iron-deficiency anemia, or an abnormal brain MRI for the antibodies associated with GFDs. Those with elevated antibodies could be referred to a gastroenterologist for further work-up, and if this is consistent with a GRD, then GFD could be tried under the guidance and monitoring of a dietician.‌‌‌‌

Click here to download the complete review.

Protandim

by

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.

Mito Q

by

MitoQ has a promising mechanism, positive preclinical data from two different ALS models, and appears reasonably safe and inexpensive, especially at doses of 10 mg daily. Available anecdotal data are insufficient to determine how helpful this might be in PALS. A small open-label pilot trial with validated ALS diagnoses and outcomes appears warranted.

Click here to download the complete review.

Lunasin

by

Lunasin has interesting mechanisms of action that might be useful in treating ALS, and it appears reasonably safe although some forms of it are expensive. While some PALS have reported improvements on lunasin, we have thus far found only one in which we were able to independently validate these improvements. This patient had atypical features for ALS including a history of myasthenia gravis, which can produce weakness that improves spontaneously. At this time there is not enough evidence to recommend that PALS take lunasin. A reasonable next step would be a small pilot trial of lunasin with validated ALS diagnoses and outcome measures.

Click here to download the complete review.