Abstract
Purpose of review
No clinical trial in sporadic inclusion body myositis (IBM) thus far has shown a clear and sustained therapeutic effect. We review previous trial methodology, explore why results have not translated into clinical practice, and suggest improvements for future IBM trials.
Recent findings
Early trials primarily assessed immunosuppressive medications, with no significant clinical responses observed. Many of these studies had methodological issues, including small participant numbers, nonspecific diagnostic criteria, short treatment and/or assessment periods and insensitive outcome measures. Most recent IBM trials have instead focused on nonimmunosuppressive therapies, but there is mounting evidence supporting a primary autoimmune aetiology, including the discovery of immunosuppression-resistant clones of cytotoxic T cells and anti-CN-1A autoantibodies which could potentially be used to stratify patients into different cohorts. The latest trials have had mixed results. For example, bimagrumab, a myostatin blocker, did not affect the 6-min timed walk distance, whereas sirolimus, a promotor of autophagy, did. Larger studies are planned to evaluate the efficacy of sirolimus and arimoclomol.
Summary
Thus far, no treatment for IBM has demonstrated a definite therapeutic effect, and effective treatment options in clinical practice are lacking. Trial design and ineffective therapies are likely to have contributed to these failures. Identification of potential therapeutic targets should be followed by future studies using a stratified approach and sensitive and relevant outcome measures.
In Pursuit of an Effective Treatment: the Past, Present and Future of Clinical Trials in Inclusion Body Myositis
