Why the study?
Does volanesorsen reduce the patient-reported disease burden in patients with familial chylomicronemia syndrome?
Does volanesorsen reduce the patient-reported disease burden in patients with familial chylomicronemia syndrome?
Volanesorsen treatment significantly improves patient-reported symptoms and reduces the psychosocial and physical disease burden in patients with familial chylomicronemia syndrome.
Hypothesis-generating for volanesorsen in FCS symptom relief; randomized trials needed before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Volanesorsen, an investigational inhibitor of apoC-III synthesis, significantly reduced triglyceride levels in clinical trials in patients with familial chylomicronemia syndrome (FCS), a rare genetic disorder characterized by marked chylomicronemia leading to a spectrum of symptoms, including recurrent abdominal pain and episodes of potentially fatal acute pancreatitis (AP). OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of volanesorsen on burden of disease on patients with FCS Methods: ReFOCUS was a retrospective global web-based survey open to patients with FCS who received volanesorsen for ≥3 months in an open-label extension study. The survey included questions about patients' experiences before and after volanesorsen treatment. RESULTS: Twenty-two respondents had received volanesorsen for a median of 222 days. Volanesorsen significantly reduced the number of symptoms per patient across physical, emotional, and cognitive domains. Significant reductions from baseline were reported for steatorrhea, pancreatic pain, and constant worry about an attack of pain/AP. Respondents reported that volanesorsen improved overall management of symptoms and reduced interference of FCS with work/school responsibilities. Reductions in the negative impact of FCS on personal, social, and professional life were also reported. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with volanesorsen has the potential to reduce disease burden in patients with FCS through modulation of multiple symptom domains.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arca et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: