Biomarkers predict outcome in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease 1A. Issue 11 (31st August 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fledrich, Robert; Mannil, Manoj; Leha, Andreas; Ehbrecht, Caroline; Solari, Alessandra; Pelayo-Negro, Ana L; Berciano, José; Schlotter-Weigel, Beate; Schnizer, Tuuli J; Prukop, Thomas; Garcia-Angarita, Natalia; Czesnik, Dirk; Haberlová, Jana; Mazanec, Radim; Paulus, Walter; Beissbarth, Tim; Walter, Maggie C; TRIAAL, CMT-; Hogrel, Jean-Yves; Dubourg, Odile; Schenone, Angelo; Baets, Jonathan; De Jonghe, Peter; Shy, Michael E; Horvath, Rita; Pareyson, Davide; Seeman, Pavel; Young, Peter; Sereda, Michael W
• Is Part Of: Journal of neurology, neurosurgery and psychiatry. Volume 88:Issue 11(2017)
• Page Start: 941
• Page End: 952
• Publication Date: 2017-08-31
• Subjects: Charcot Marie Tooth disease 1A -- biomarker -- disease severity -- disease progression -- skin biopsy; Neurology -- Periodicals; Nervous system -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Psychiatry -- Periodicals; 616.8
• DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2017-315721
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0022-3050

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A (CMT1A) is the most common inherited neuropathy, a debilitating disease without known cure. Among patients with CMT1A, disease manifestation, progression and severity are strikingly variable, which poses major challenges for the development of new therapies. Hence, there is a strong need for sensitive outcome measures such as disease and progression biomarkers, which would add powerful tools to monitor therapeutic effects in CMT1A. Methods: We established a pan-European and American consortium comprising nine clinical centres including 311 patients with CMT1A in total. From all patients, the CMT neuropathy score and secondary outcome measures were obtained and a skin biopsy collected. In order to assess and validate disease severity and progression biomarkers, we performed qPCR on a set of 16 animal model-derived potential biomarkers in skin biopsy mRNA extracts. Results: In 266 patients with CMT1A, a cluster of eight cutaneous transcripts differentiates disease severity with a sensitivity and specificity of 90% and 76.1%, respectively. In an additional cohort of 45 patients with CMT1A, from whom a second skin biopsy was taken after 2–3 years, the cutaneous mRNA expression of GSTT2, CTSA, PPARG, CDA, ENPP1 and NRG1-Iis changing over time and correlates with disease progression. Conclusions: In summary, we provide evidence that cutaneous transcripts in patients with CMT1A serve as disease severity and progression biomarkers and, if implemented into clinical trials, they could markedly accelerate the development of a therapy for CMT1A.