↓ Skip to main content

Effects of acetyl-DL-leucine on cerebellar ataxia (ALCAT trial): study protocol for a multicenter, multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover phase III trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of acetyl-DL-leucine on cerebellar ataxia (ALCAT trial): study protocol for a multicenter, multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover phase III trial
Published in
BMC Neurology, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12883-016-0786-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katharina Feil, Christine Adrion, Julian Teufel, Sylvia Bösch, Jens Claassen, Ilaria Giordano, Holger Hengel, Heike Jacobi, Thomas Klockgether, Thomas Klopstock, Wolfgang Nachbauer, Ludger Schöls, Claudia Stendel, Ellen Uslar, Bart van de Warrenburg, Ingrid Berger, Ivonne Naumann, Otmar Bayer, Hans-Helge Müller, Ulrich Mansmann, Michael Strupp

Abstract

Cerebellar ataxia (CA) is a frequent and often disabling condition that impairs motor functioning and impacts on quality of life (QoL). No medication has yet been proven effective for the symptomatic or even causative treatment of hereditary or non-hereditary, non-acquired CA. So far, the only treatment recommendation is physiotherapy. Therefore, new therapeutic options are needed. Based on three observational studies, the primary objective of the acetyl-DL-leucine on ataxia (ALCAT) trial is to examine the efficacy and tolerability of a symptomatic therapy with acetyl-DL-leucine compared to placebo on motor function measured by the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) in patients with CA. An investigator-initiated, multicenter, European, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-treatment 2-period crossover phase III trial will be carried out. In total, 108 adult patients who meet the clinical criteria of CA of different etiologies (hereditary or non-hereditary, non-acquired) presenting with a SARA total score of at least 3 points will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to one of two different treatment sequences, either acetyl-DL-leucine (up to 5 g per day) followed by placebo or vice versa. Each sequence consists of two 6-week treatment periods, separated by a 4-week wash-out period. A follow-up examination is scheduled 4 weeks after the end of treatment. The primary efficacy outcome is the absolute change in the SARA total score. Secondary objectives are to demonstrate that acetyl-DL-leucine is effective in improving (1) motor function measured by the Spinocerebellar Ataxia Functional Index (SCAFI) and SARA subscore items and (2) QoL (EuroQoL 5 dimensions and 5 level version, EQ-5D-5 L), depression (Beck Depression Inventory, BDI-II) and fatigue (Fatigue Severity Score, FSS). Furthermore, the incidence of adverse events will be investigated. The results of this trial will inform whether symptomatic treatment with the modified amino-acid acetyl-DL-leucine is a worthy candidate for a new drug therapy to relieve ataxia symptoms and to improve patient care. If superiority of the experimental drug to placebo can be established it will also be re-purposing of an agent that has been previously used for the symptomatic treatment of dizziness. The trial was prospectively registered at www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu (EudraCT no. 2015-000460-34) and at https://www.germanctr.de (DRKS-ID: DRKS00009733 ).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 13%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 6 8%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 28 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 15%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 32 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2019.
All research outputs
#15,478,452
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#1,499
of 2,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,702
of 421,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#19
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,458 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,970 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.