BACKGROUND Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a rare genetic neuromuscular disease caused by deletions or mutations of the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene. Despite the availability of genetically based treatments for SMA, functional impairments and weakness persist in treated symptomatic individuals. This study addresses whether additional treatment after gene transfer therapy could provide further clinical benefits.METHODS Interim day 302 findings are described from the phase IV open-label RESPOND trial evaluating nusinersen in participants aged ≤36 months who had suboptimal clinical status following onasemnogene abeparvovec (OA) treatment, as determined by the investigator.RESULTS Thirty-seven participants included in the interim analysis were symptomatic at the time of OA administration. Most (92%) had 2 SMN2 gene copies. Age at first nusinersen dose (median) was 9.1 (range, 3–33) months for participants with 2 SMN2 copies and 34.2 (range, 31–36) months for those with 3 SMN2 copies, while time from OA dose to first nusinersen dose (median) was 6.3 (range, 3–31) and 13.3 (range, 10–22) months, respectively. Participants had elevated neurofilament light chain (NfL) levels and low compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitudes at baseline, suggesting active neurodegeneration and severe denervation at study entry. Improvements from baseline were observed across a range of outcomes on day 302, including motor function (HINE-2 and CHOP-INTEND total score), achievement of independent sitting, NfL levels, CMAP, and investigator- and caregiver-reported outcomes. Mean NfL levels decreased rapidly from baseline to day 183 and remained low on day 302. Mean ulnar and peroneal CMAP amplitudes increased. No safety concerns were identified.CONCLUSION Improvements in clinical and biomarker outcomes support the benefit of nusinersen treatment in infants and children with suboptimal clinical status following OA.TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04488133; EudraCT 2020-003492-18.FUNDING This study was sponsored by Biogen.
Crystal M. Proud, Richard S. Finkel, Julie A. Parsons, Riccardo Masson, John F. Brandsema, Nancy L. Kuntz, Richard Foster, Wenjing Li, Ross Littauer, Jihee Sohn, Stephanie Fradette, Bora Youn, Angela D. Paradis, on behalf of the RESPOND Study Group
Usage data is cumulative from September 2025 through March 2026.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 4,475 | 480 |
| 1,499 | 231 | |
| Figure | 614 | 1 |
| Table | 215 | 0 |
| Supplemental data | 473 | 38 |
| Citation downloads | 134 | 0 |
| Totals | 7,410 | 750 |
| Total Views | 8,160 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.