Ataluren for the treatment of nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

Background: Ataluren was developed to restore functional protein production in genetic disorders caused by nonsense mutations, which are the cause of cystic fibrosis in 10% of patients. This trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of ataluren in patients with nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis. 

Methods: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study enrolled patients from 36 sites in 11 countries in North America and Europe. Eligible patients with nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis (aged ≥6 years; abnormal nasal potential difference; sweat chloride >40 mmol/L; forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV₁] ≥40% and ≤90%) were randomly assigned by interactive response technology to receive oral ataluren (10 mg/kg in morning, 10 mg/kg midday, and 20 mg/kg in evening) or matching placebo for 48 weeks. Randomisation used a block size of four, stratified by age, chronic inhaled antibiotic use, and percent-predicted FEV₁. The primary endpoint was relative change in percent-predicted FEV₁ from baseline to week 48, analysed in all patients with a post-baseline spirometry measurement. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00803205. 

Findings: Between Sept 8, 2009, and Nov 30, 2010, 238 patients were randomly assigned, of whom 116 in each treatment group had a valid post-baseline spirometry measurement. Relative change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV₁ did not differ significantly between ataluren and placebo at week 48 (-2·5% vs -5·5%; difference 3·0% [95% CI -0·8 to 6·3]; p=0·12). The number of pulmonary exacerbations did not differ significantly between treatment groups (rate ratio 0·77 [95% CI 0·57-1·05]; p=0·0992). However, post-hoc analysis of the subgroup of patients not using chronic inhaled tobramycin showed a 5·7% difference (95% CI 1·5-10·1) in relative change from baseline in percent-predicted FEV₁ between the ataluren and placebo groups at week 48 (-0·7% [-4·0 to 2·1] vs -6·4% [-9·8 to -3·7]; nominal p=0·0082), and fewer pulmonary exacerbations in the ataluern group (1·42 events [0·9-1·9] vs 2·18 events [1·6-2·7]; rate ratio 0·60 [0·42-0·86]; nominal p=0·0061). Safety profiles were generally similar for ataluren and placebo, except for the occurrence of increased creatinine concentrations (ie, acute kidney injury), which occurred in 18 (15%) of 118 patients in the ataluren group compared with one (<1%) of 120 patients in the placebo group. No life-threatening adverse events or deaths were reported in either group. I

nterpretation: Although ataluren did not improve lung function in the overall population of nonsense-mutation cystic fibrosis patients who received this treatment, it might be beneficial for patients not taking chronic inhaled tobramycin. 

Funding: PTC Therapeutics, Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, US Food and Drug Administration's Office of Orphan Products Development, and the National Institutes of Health. 

Practical guidelines: Lung transplantation in patients with cystic fibrosis

There are no European recommendations on issues specifically related to lung transplantation (LTX) in cystic fibrosis (CF). The main goal of this paper is to provide CF care team members with clinically relevant CF-specific information on all aspects of LTX, highlighting areas of consensus and controversy throughout Europe. Bilateral lung transplantation has been shown to be an important therapeutic option for end-stage CF pulmonary disease. Transplant function and patient survival after transplantation are better than in most other indications for this procedure. Attention though has to be paid to pretransplant morbidity, time for referral, evaluation, indication, and contraindication in children and in adults. This review makes extensive use of specific evidence in the field of lung transplantation in CF patients and addresses all issues of practical importance. The requirements of pre-, peri-, and postoperative management are discussed in detail including bridging to transplant and postoperative complications, immune suppression, chronic allograft dysfunction, infection, and malignancies being the most important. Among the contributors to this guiding information are 19 members of the ECORN-CF project and other experts. The document is endorsed by the European Cystic Fibrosis Society and sponsored by the Christiane Herzog Foundation. 

Debating Darwin at the Cape

This paper focuses attention on the fortunes of Darwin's theory among the English-speaking community in Cape Colony during the latter part of the nineteenth century. The paper begins with a review of early encounters with Darwin dwelling particularly on the response of figures like Roderick Noble - professor and editor of the Cape Monthly Magazine, the geologist John Shaw, and Sir Henry Barkly, governor of the colony. Besides these more theoretical responses, Darwin's ideas were also mobilised in a range of scientific inquiries on such subjects as birds and butterflies. But most conspicuous was the use of evolutionary thought-forms in the work of the eminent philologist Wilhelm Bleek, cousin of Darwin's leading German apologist, Ernst Haeckel. The prevailing sense is of a liberal intelligentsia calmly interacting with a novel theory with all due deference. During the 1870s, an address by Langham Dale at the South African Public Library injected new energy into the Darwin discussion. Dale expressed disquiet over some of the anthropological implications of evolution as well as its apparent reductionism, and this stimulated a range of reactions. Several anonymous commentators responded but the most sustained evaluation of Dale's position emanated from the Queenstown physician and later politician, Sir William Bisset Berry. Then, in 1874, copious extracts from John Tyndall's infamous 'Belfast Address' were printed in the Cape Monthly and this added yet further impetus to the debate. Tyndall's seeming materialism bothered a number of readers, not least Hon William Porter, former attorney-general of Cape Colony. To figures like these the materialist extrapolations of radical Darwinians such as Haeckel were deeply disturbing, not just for religious reasons, but because they seemed to destabilise the moral and pedagogic progressivism that lay at the heart of their civilising credo. While reservations about Darwin's proposals were certainly audible, taken in the round Darwinian conversations among the English-speaking literati at the Cape were conducted with liberal sentiments, not least when evolutionary science approached questions of race. For Darwin's writings were seen to confirm a monogenetic account of the origin and unity of the human race, and could readily be called upon to justify the paternalistic ideology that governed colonial affairs.

Forced Displacement, Suffering and the Aesthetics of Loss

This article investigates how artists have addressed shocking experiences of displacement in different political contexts. Drawing on the notion of ‘the aesthetics of loss’ (Köstlin, 2010), it examines and compares the different aims, desires and strategies that have shaped the histories and social lives of paintings, memorial statues, installations and other artefacts. The analysis identifies a mode of artistic engagement with the sense of a ‘loss of homeland’ that has been commonly felt amongst Sudeten German expellees, namely the production and framing of visual images as markers of collective trauma. These aesthetics of loss are contrasted with the approach taken by the Dutch artist Sophie Ernst in her project entitled HOME. Working with displaced people from Pakistan, India, Palestine, Israel and Iraq, she created a mnemonic space to stimulate a more individualistic, exploratory engagement with the loss of home, which aimed, in part, to elicit interpersonal empathy. To simply oppose these two modes of aesthetic engagement, however, would ignore the ways in which artefacts are drawn into different discursive, affective and spatial formations. This article argues for the need to expose such dynamic processes of framing and reframing by focusing on the processual aspects of aestheticisation with attention to the perspective of loss.