LILITE CONCEIÇÃO DA SILVA BARBOSA
DUCHENNE AND BECKER’S DYSTROPHINOPATHIES
A REVIEW OF THE LATEST THERAPEUTIC STRATEGIES AND REHABILITATION
PROGRAMMES
2010
LILITE CONCEIÇÃO DA SILVA BARBOSA
DUCHENNE AND BECKER’S DYSTROPHINOPATHIES
A review of the latest therapeutic strategies and rehabilitation
programmes
Porto, 2010
LILITE CONCEIÇÃO DA SILVA BARBOSA
DUCHENNE AND BECKER’S DYSTROPHINOPATHIES
A review of the latest therapeutic strategies and rehabilitation
programmes
Tutor: MANUEL JORGE ROCHA MELO PIRES
PhD (University of London)
Porto, 2010
Dissertation presented to the
Course of Integrated Masters in
Medicine to acquire the Master
Degree in Medicine.
LILITE CONCEIÇÃO DA SILVA BARBOSA
DUCHENNE AND BECKER’S DYSTROPHINOPATHIES
A review of the latest therapeutic strategies and
rehabilitation programmes
Approval date: __________________________________
Jury:
Prof. Dr. . ...................................................................
Prof. Dr. . ...................................................................
Prof. Dr. . ...................................................................
iv
SUMMARY
Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophies are X-linked progressive
dystrophinopathies that result of genetic defects in dystrophin, the major
structural protein of the muscle. Their clinical patterns are similar and include
gradual generalized weakness and wasting of all voluntary muscles as well as
several other physical symptoms. Duchenne dystrophy differs from Becker
muscular dystrophy which has a later age of onset and a slower rate of
progression.
The correct diagnosis is very important to avoid misclassifications and it
relies both in clinical signs and in important tools such as measurement of
creatine phosphokinase, electromyography, muscle biopsy and genetic testing.
Therapeutic strategies for dystrophinopathies can be categorized into
three groups: molecular, cellular and pharmacological therapies. Molecular
therapy involves viral and non-viral approaches while cellular therapy involves
myoblast and stem cell strategies. Currently, pharmacological therapies are
supportive and play the main role in stopping disease‟s progression. They
involve a multidisciplinary approach early in the disease with the use of drugs/
molecules to improve the phenotype as well as rehabilitation programs including
physiotherapy or surgery.
Key Words: Dystrophinopathies; Molecular Therapy; Cellular therapy;
Pharmacological Therapy.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures .......................................................................................vii
Introduction...........................................................................................8
Pathophysiology ...................................................................................8
Clinical Features ...................................................................................10
Diagnosis..............................................................................................11
Differential Diagnosis ...........................................................................13
Evaluation of Disease‟s Progression ....................................................14
Treatment .............................................................................................15
Molecular Therapy ................................................................................15
1. Viral-mediated Gene Therapy ................................................15
A. Adenovirus Vectors .....................................................15
B. Helper-dependent/gutted Adenoviral Vectors .............15
C. Adeno-associated Virus Vectors .................................16
D. Lentivirus Vectors .......................................................16
E. Homologous Recombination .......................................16
F. Utrophin Genetic Up-regulation ...................................16
2. Non-viral Gene Therapy .........................................................17
A. Plasmid DNA ..............................................................17
B. Antisense Oligonucleotides .........................................18
C. Chimeric RNA/DNA Oligonucleotides .........................19
Cellular Therapy ...................................................................................20
1. Myoblast Transplantation .......................................................20
2. Stem Cell Therapy .................................................................21
Pharmacological Therapy .....................................................................22
vi
1. Anti-inflammatory Drugs ........................................................22
A. Steroids .......................................................................22
B. Other Anti-inflammatory drugs ....................................25
2. Specific Anti-cytokine drugs ...................................................26
3. Anabolic Processes Stimulation .............................................26
A. Myostatin Regulation ..................................................26
B. Insulin-like Growth Factor I .........................................26
C. β2-agonists .................................................................27
4. Antibiotics ..............................................................................27
5. Anti-proteases ........................................................................28
6. Anti-oxidants ..........................................................................28
7. Pharmacological utrophin up-regulation .................................29
8. Supplements ..........................................................................30
9. Management of Complications ..............................................31
A. Respiratory .................................................................31
B. Cardiac .......................................................................31
C. Orthopedic ..................................................................32
i. Ambulant Children .............................................32
ii. Non-ambulant Children .....................................32
iii. Management of Scoliosis .................................32
Conclusion............................................................................................33
References ...........................................................................................34
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Gower‟s Sign ........................................................................10
Figure 2: Muscle Biopsy (H&E staining) ...............................................11
Figure 3: Western Blot of Dystrophin ...................................................12
Figure 4: Dystrophin Staining ...............................................................13
8
INTRODUCTION
The muscular dystrophies are a group of inherited myogenic disorders
that share a set of clinical and pathological characteristics but differ in severity,
inheritance pattern, and molecular defect.
The most well known and prevalent of these disorders is Duchenne
Muscular Dystrophy (DMD), followed by Becker Muscular Dystrophy (BMD), a
clinically similar disorder but less severe. Both of them are X-linked progressive
Muscular Dystrophies with an incidence of 1/3500 male births in DMD and
1/30000 males in BMD “Emery (1991)”.
Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy was originally describe by Edward
Meyron in 1851 “Meyron (1851)” but it was only when Duchenne detailed the
clinical and muscle histology in 1861 that it became a recognized independent
disorder “Duchenne (1861)”. Almost 100 years later, in 1953 Becker described
an allelic variant to DMD with later age of onset and slower progression;
nowadays known as Becker Muscular Dystrophy “Becker (1953)”.
PPPAAATTTHHHOOOPPPHHHYYYSSSIIIOOOLLLOOOGGGYYY
DMD and BMD result of genetic defects in the major muscle cell
structural protein known as dystrophin, being also called Dystrophinopathies.
The dystrophin gene is the largest described to date, it‟s located on Xp21 and it
occupies almost 2% of that chromosome. Dystrophin is a physiological 427 kDa
protein located in the subsarcolemmal region of the muscle fiber and it‟s
responsible for stabilizing the plasma membrane against mechanical stress
during muscle fiber contraction “Hoffman et al. (1987)”. It is organized into four
structural domains: the N-terminal actin-binding, the central rod domain, the
cysteine-rich domain binding, and the carboxy-terminal “Hoffman et al. (1987)”
”Koenig et al. (1988)”. Dystrophin is expressed mainly in skeletal muscle but it
also can be found in smooth muscle cells, cardiac myocytes and, in lower
levels, in brain.
Nonstructural roles have been described for dystrophin, making it a
multifunctional protein. In one hand, the dystrophin complex serves as a
signaling scaffold that is responsive to extracellular stressors and several
9
signaling molecules interact with it “Brenman et al. (1995); Yang et al. (1995);
Abramovici et al. (2003); Oak et al. (2003)”. In the other hand, dystrophin is
thought to play a role in calcium homeostasis, resulting in the aberrant
hyperactivation of signaling cascades involved in the inflammatory response.
This apparent sensitivity of dystrophic muscle in triggering inflammation due to
aberrant calcium homeostasis may be detrimental to muscle cell survival and to
the potential introduction of therapeutics “Turner et al. (1991); Iwata et al.
(2003); Kumar et al. (2004)”.
Mutations in dystrophin gene comprise deletions (60-70% of cases),
duplications (10-15%) and point mutations (10-15%). In one third of the cases,
mutations occur de novo “Neri et al. (2007)”.
The gene-coded defects of dystrophin underlie DMD, which is marked by
absence or severe reduction of the protein, and BMD with presence of
dystrophin but defective one “Reitter and Goebel (1996)”. The threshold level of
dystrophin mRNA and protein sufficient to maintain proper membrane
organization and prevent muscle degeneration in humans is between 29% and
57%, if dystrophin is uniformly present in all muscle fibers “Neri et al. (2007)”.
This lower level is similar to the one found in previous transgenic experiences
on mdx mice “Wells et al. (1995)”. There is also a correlation between the
amount of dystrophin expressed and the clinical severity: absence or less than
3% of normal dystrophin results in severe DMD; from 3-10% correlates with
severe BMD; and from 20-30% of normal or altered dystrophin results mild BMD
“Hoffman et al (1988)”.
Only one highly homologous dystrophin protein (80%), utrophin or
dystrophin-related protein was described until now and it‟s encoded by a gene
in chromosome 6 “Khurana et al. (1990)”. In developing skeletal muscle,
utrophin showed to identify the entire sarcolemmal membrane. It was reported a
phenomenon of utrophin up-regulation in dystrophic muscle but this increase in
utrophin levels doesn‟t prevent muscle degeneration; it only delays the
progression of the disease “Vainzof et al (1995)”.
10
CCCLLLIIINNNIIICCCAAALLL FFFEEEAAATTTUUURRREEESSS
In DMD, the onset is early in childhood, at 2-6 years of life, with a
waddling gait secondary to hip girdle muscle weakness. Very often parents note
that the child pushes on his knees in order to stand, sign known as Gower‟s
sign (Fig.1) “Gowers (1988)”. Cognitive impairment is usual and about 20% of
affected children have an IQ lower than 70. Calf enlargement (calf
pseudohypertrophy) is common, resulting of fatty and fibrotic infiltration of
degenerative calf muscles. Progressive weakness is seen in the proximal
musculature, initially in the lower extremities but later on also in the upper ones.
Around the age of 8 respiratory muscle‟s strength and ambulation capacity start
to decline, most of the patients being wheelchair bounded by the age of 10.
Scoliosis appears once wheelchair dependency is achieved which further
compromises pulmonary, cardiac and gastrointestinal function “Emery (1993)”.
In the past, patients developed terminal respiratory or cardiac failure due to
wheelchair bound and profound weakness by the early twenties; nowadays the
survival increased to late twenties “Simons et al. (1998)”.
BMD is characterized by a later age of onset, normally around 12 years;
distribution of muscle wasting and weakness similar to DMD but with a slower
rate of progression. The loss of ambulation may vary but mostly it occurs from
adolescence on, being the expectancy of life in BMD about 40 years of age with
90% of the patients alive beyond twenty years “Becker and Kiener (1955)”.
Fig.1: Gower‟s sign
11
DDDIIIAAAGGGNNNOOOSSSIIISSS
Measurement of serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK) is an easy and
sensitive test when suspecting of any muscle disease and correlates with the
amount of muscle degeneration. Patients with DMD and BMD have increased
levels of CPK since birth and they are 50 to 100 times higher than the reference
range. The neonatal screening of CPK for boys with family history and the
standard evaluation of CPK serum levels in boys with developmental
impairment are recommended since they decrease substantially the diagnosis‟
delay “Ciafaloni et al. (2009)”.
Electromyography, even though not diagnostic, is important to exclude
neurogenic causes of weakness.
Muscle biopsy, along with immunohistochemistry and Western Blot
analysis, is an essential adjunctive tool because in the majority of cases it‟s the
deciding factor for diagnosis before genetics studies. Muscle biopsy shows
increased variability of fiber size, rounding of fibers, fiber splitting, increased
numbers of central nuclei, hyaline fibers, muscle fiber necrosis, phagocytosis
and regeneration, and replacement by fat and fibrous tissue “Hilton-Jones
(2001)” (Fig.2).
a
q
b
q Fig.2: H&E (a) Normal muscle biopsy. (b) DMD fibers are smaller and
rounded. The fiber size is variable with many hypercontracted fibers. The
endomysial connective tissue is increased (fibrosis).
12
Western blot analysis for dystrophin in muscle allows the determination
of both the quantity and size of the molecule. In DMD dystrophin is absent or
levels less than 3% can be found. In 80% of patients with BMD, the molecular
weight of dystrophin is reduced to 20-90% of normal, 15% have reduced
quantity and 5% show an abnormally large protein “Hoffman et al (1988)”
(Fig.3). Muscle biopsy has the disadvantage of being an invasive procedure.
Fig.3: Western blot of dystrophin.
Lane 1: BMD; Dystrophin has reduced abundance but normal size.
Lane 2: BMD; Dystrophin has reduced size and abundance.
Lane 3: Normal; Dystrophin has normal size and amount.
Lane 4: DMD; Almost no protein is present.
Lane 5: DMD; Dystrophin has severely reduced abundance.
Immunostaining for dystrophin and utrophin on skin biopsies is also a
reliable tool for the diagnosis of dystrophinopathies “Tanveer et al. (2009)”.
Diagnosis can be achieved by genetic testing on a peripheral blood
sample. About 96% of mutations are identified by direct sequencing of the
dystrophin gene. The three main techniques are used in a 3-time approach:
first polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification to detect large deletions;
secondly detection of virtually all mutations (DOVAM) for point mutations; thirdly
multiplex amplifiable probe hybridization (MAPH) to define duplications. Since
the dystrophin gene is very large, most testing protocols only screen a part of
the gene. Thereby, a negative genetic test doesn‟t exclude the diagnosis and a
muscle biopsy is required “Dent et al. (2005)”.
Genetic counseling is very important and the first line test to determine
the female carrier status is a sensitive PCR for the same deletion/ duplication
observed in the affected child. With the possibility of germline mosaicism a
negative carrier test doesn‟t exclude the risk of mutation. Moreover, one third of
the cases represent new mutations.
For the prenatal diagnosis, multiplex PCR can detect around 93% of
deletions being simple, reliable and inexpensive. Multiplex ligation-dependent
probe amplification (MLPA) is important for detecting deletions in non-hot
regions/exons and duplications “Clemens et al. (1991); Li et al. (2009)”.
13
DDDIIIFFFFFFEEERRREEENNNTTTIIIAAALLL DDDIIIAAAGGGNNNOOOSSSIIISSS
There can be clinical and histopathologic overlap between muscular
dystrophies and inflammatory myopathies. Pathologic findings of inflammation
and major histocompatibility complex up-regulation, typical of inflammatory
myopathies, occur in some muscular dystrophies. Dystrophin levels should be
access by immunocytochemical staining in all cases “Nirmalananthana et al.
(2004)” (Fig.4).
Fig.4: Dystrophin staining. (a) Normal dystrophin staining around the rim of muscle fibers.
(b) Absent dystrophin in DMD. (c) DMD with one “revertant” fiber with dystrophin staining.
Limb-girdle muscular dystrophies are clinically similar to DMD, but occur
in both sexes due to autosomal recessive and autosomal dominant inheritance.
Testing for deficiency of proteins from the transmembrane sarcoglycans
complex is indicated in dystrophin-positive dystrophies (Erazo-Torricelli (2004)”.
Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy is associated with limb contractures
and cardiac arrhythmia. X-linked recessive forms are identified by emerin deficit
on immunohistochemistry, autosomal dominant and autosomal recessive forms
are both exclusively identified by DNA study “Erazo-Torricelli (2004)”.
Spinal Muscle Atrophy is characterized by poor muscle tone and
symmetric muscle weakness sparing the face and ocular muscles due to
anterior horn cell loss. The definitive diagnosis relies on DNA analysis of
mutations in the Survival of Motor Neuron 1 gene (SMN1) “Monani (2005)”.
a
q
c
q
b
q
14
EEEVVVAAALLLUUUAAATTTIIIOOONNN OOOFFF DDDIIISSSEEEAAASSSEEE’’’SSS PPPRRROOOGGGRRREEESSSSSSIIIOOONNN
Annual neurological, respiratory and cardiological assessments should
be co-ordinated via a centralized rehabilitation unit.
From the time of diagnosis boys must be assessed once to twice a year
by therapists with special experience in neuromuscular disorders. The interval
between assessments depends on boy‟s age, disease‟s progression and his
functional ability “Bushby et al. (2005)”.
Respiratory surveillance should include: serial spirometry accessing
forced vital capacity (FVC) and peak expiratory flow (PEF) to document the
progression of respiratory muscle weakness; serial measurement of nocturnal
oxycapnography/polisomnography, once clinical signs of nocturnal
hypoventilation; serial measurement of peak cough flow; chest and spine
radiograph for monitoring scoliosis‟ degree and chest deformities “Finder et al.
(2004)”.
Cardiac investigation (echocardiogram and electrocardiogram) is
indicated at diagnosis, every 2 years thereafter to age of 10 and then annually,
or more often, if abnormalities are detected “American Academy of Pediatrics
(2005)”.
15
TTRREEAATTMMEENNTT
Therapeutic strategies for dystrophinopathies are divided into 3 groups
based on their approach: molecular, cellular and pharmacological therapy.
MMMOOOLLLEEECCCUUULLLAAARRR TTTHHHEEERRRAAAPPPYYY
1. VIRAL-MEDIATED GENE THERAPY
The aim is to deliver DNA encoding dystrophin or other therapeutic
genes (utrophin) to muscle. To date most dystrophin-delivery approaches are
hampered by the gene‟s large size (it‟s larger than the cloning capacity of most
current viral vectors), immune responses to the protein and viral antigens, and
difficulty finding an effective delivery system. Important advances were made in
identifying key regions of the gene in truncated dystrophin gene construction,
optimal vectors for gene delivery and better delivery methods.
A. Adenovirus vectors
The first gene transfer vectors derived from adenovirus and, despite their
success in delivering dystrophin up to 50% to myofibers, they were too small to
fit the entire coding sequence of dystrophin. Functional studies of the gene in
mdx mice showed that multiple regions of dystrophin can be deleted in various
combinations to generate highly functional mini- and microdystrophin genes
with the advantage of being within viral/plasmid cloning capacities “Fabb et al.
(2002)”. One important problem was still remaining; the strong immune
response they caused “Smith (1995)”.
B. Helper-dependent/gutted adenoviral vectors
To overcome some of the limitations with adenovirus vectors, helper-
dependent or gutted adenoviral vectors, which are deleted for all of the viral
protein coding sequences, started to be used. Although a weaker immune
reaction was induced, they had to cross the basal lamina of muscle fibers
reducing the efficiency of transduction. A co-deliverance of immunomodulatory
molecules such as CTL4AIg was suggested to face some of these problems
“Parks et al. (1996); Dudley et al. (2004); Jiang et al. (2004)”.
16
C. Adeno-associated virus vectors (AAV)
Another promising viral vector is AAV given its nonpathogenicity, broad
tropism and infectivity and long-term persistence. These vectors appear to be
more efficient for transducing adult fibers, especially if delivered systemically
together with factors that increase vascular permeability. They can only
accommodate minidystrophin which gives good functional rescue when
replacing dystrophin in transgenic mdx mice “Wang et al. (2000)”.
D. Lentivirus vectors
Additional viral vectors being tested for gene transfer to muscle are the
HIV-derived lentiviral vectors. They have been found to stably transduce post-
mitotic cells with expression lasting up to 2 months with no associated immune
response “Odom et al. (2007)”.
E. Homologous Recombination (HR)
Other approach is called gene targeting, which means the replacement of
an endogenous DNA segment with a homologous, exogenous segment of DNA
by HR. A major advantage of the HR gene targeting approach is that the risk of
random integration as is presented with retroviral mediated gene replacement
can be avoided or minimized; this has been accomplished using helper-
dependent Adenovirus as a vector platform “Odom et al. (2007)”.
F. Utrophin genetic up-regulation
In skeletal muscle, utrophin is detectable in early fetal development over
the sarcolemma where during development it is gradually replaced by
dystrophin. This different expression proposed that utrophin may be the
embryonic/neonatal form of dystrophin thus; utrophin up-regulation would allow
replacement of dysfunctional or absent dystrophin. Furthermore, this approach
benefits from the lack of neoantigen production and subsequent immune
response that might result with the delivery of dystrophin “Miura and Jasmin
(2006)”.
17
2. NON-VIRAL GENE THERAPY
Three different methodologies have been pursued: 1) plasmid DNA to
deliver dystrophin cDNA constructs; 2) antisense oligonucleotides (AONs) to
induce exon skipping of the dystrophin pre-mRNA; 3) RNA/DNA chimeric
oligonucleotides for genome editing and gene correction. The main
disadvantage of non-viral vectors is the delivery mechanism but they also have
the potential to induce immune responses, although in a lower level. It is
considered that non-viral vectors will represent a less expensive and safer
mode of therapy “Rando (2007)”.
A. Plasmid DNA
This therapy is based on the observation that naked plasmid DNA,
delivered to skeletal muscle by direct injection, is taken up in the myofiber
where plasmid genes are expressed. Intramuscular or intravenous/arterial
injection of a therapeutic plasmid into mdx mice result in dystrophin expression
in up to 10% of the muscle fibers “Acsadi et al. (1991); Liang et al. (2004)”.
There are several positive aspects of this therapy including already
existing scaled-up production processes, applicability to DMD patients
regardless of mutation, and simplicity. Still, controversial issues exist and the
expected duration of plasmid gene expression is one of them; in human
treatment this expression would be necessary to last for years/decades.
Research leading to plasmid persistence is being made by introducing the
dystrophin plasmid into a single site in the genome with the use of integrases.
Ideally the integrases should be site-specific but currently they aren‟t which may
lead to insertional mutagenesis. Another concern regards the distribution of the
vector and thus the therapeutic protein along the length of muscle fibers in a
targeted muscle. Any fiber not expressing dystrophin at therapeutic levels along
its length will eventually succumb; thus the importance of quantifying dystrophin
expression not only in the muscle cross-sections but also along the longitudinal
axis of the muscle “Molnar et al. (2004); Bertoni et al. (2006)”.
18
B. Antisense oligonucleotides (AONs)
The possible therapeutic benefit of dystrophin transcript splicing
modifications is based on the fact that most cases of DMD are caused by
deletions in the dystrophin gene that lead to frame-shift mutations in the
transcript. This led to the idea of using AONs to alter splicing so that the open
reading frame is restored and the severe DMD phenotype is converted into a
milder BMD phenotype. Recent studies have clearly established the potential of
AONs induced exon-skipping approach since dystrophin expression was
enhanced with repeated injections and no immune response was elicited
“McClorey et al. (2006)”. It has been estimated that 70% of patients with DMD
caused by intragenic deletions could benefit from this therapy. Phase I clinical
trials with AONs in humans are being conducted to test intramuscular injections
of AONs for safety and efficacy “Muntoni et al. (2005)”. Recently, a study
reported that the application of multiexon skipping may provide a more uniform
methodology for a larger group of patients with DMD “Aartsma et al. (2004)”.
This approach corrects all dystrophin isoforms and maintains the original
tissue-specific gene regulation however, its application requires an accurate
molecular diagnosis, a rational plan for skipping one or more exons to produce
an in-frame transcript, evidence that targeting AONs to specific sequences will
result in the desired transcript, and finally the design of AONs vectors
specifically for that particular mutation “Wilton and Fletcher (2008)”. It also has a
transient therapeutic effect and AONs therapy would require multiple treatments
each year. One solution was combining AONs technology with viral expression
approaches to achieve sustained expression of antisense vectors and long-term
exon skipping but this entails the challenges of viral-mediated gene therapy
“Goyenvalle et al. (2004)”.
19
C. Chimeric RNA/DNA oligonucleotides
Chimeric RNA/DNA oligonucleotides can be used to direct the correction
of a mutation by inducing preferential gene conversion from a mutant to a
functional allele. Such genome editing potential could be applied to the
correction of point mutations responsible for dystrophin deficiency in
approximately 15% of patients with DMD. Injection of chimeric oligonucleotides
in mdx mice showed correction at the genomic and transcript levels, and
restoration of dystrophin protein expression was observed both in vivo and in
vitro “Rando et al. (2000); Bertoni and Rando (2002)”. To benefit more patients
with dystrophin defects other than point mutations, broader applications of this
approach have been envisioned. Recently, attempts to correct mutations that
disrupt the translational reading frame were made by targeting the exon/intron
boundaries of the mutated exon 23 in mdx mice. It resulted in skipping/removal
of this exon and production of a truncated but functional protein. The use of this
technique has to overcome similar problems described in the AONs therapy,
such as the location of the particular splice site to be targeted “Bertoni et al.
(2003)”. The major challenge concerning chimeric compounds is the low
efficiency observed of this technology with current vectors “Rando et al. (2000);
Bertoni et al. (2005)”. Current research is focusing on the enhancement of the
molecular mechanisms that mediate the gene editing, including modifications of
the oligonucleotides as well as enzyme systems and cellular processes involved
in the repair mechanism “Bertoni et al. (2006).”
Perhaps the greatest advantage is that it results in a permanent
correction of the genetic defect in myonuclei allowing sustained therapeutic
benefit as long as the targeted myonuclei persist.
20
CCCEEELLLLLLUUULLLAAARRR TTTHHHEEERRRAAAPPPYYY
Cell-based strategies comprise two main subjects of investigation:
transplantation of myoblasts from a healthy donor expressing normal
dystrophin; use of stem cells (ST) obtained from the patient that must be
„genetically corrected‟ in vitro. Recent works suggest the most promising
possibility for the treatment of DMD being a combination of different
approaches, such as gene and stem cell therapy “Farini et al. (2009)”.
1. MYOBLAST TRANSPLANTATION
This procedure involves injecting or transplanting donor muscle precursor
cells (myoblasts) into a dystrophic host. The goal is to induce expression of
dystrophin through fusion of dystrophin-positive myoblasts of the donor with
dystrophin-deficient muscle fibers of the host. Although shown to be promising
in mdx mice “Ikezawa et al.(2003)”, human trials didn‟t demonstrate objective
benefits with low levels of dystrophin expression “Mendell et al. (1995);
Partridge (2002)”. Myoblast transplantation has several limitations, including
immune rejection, poor cellular survival rates (80% undergo a rapid and
massive death soon after the injection) and lack of dispersion of injected cells
which limits the effect to the injection area “Gussoni et al. (1997); Mouly et al.
(2005); Skuk et al. (2006)”.
A recent study concluded that fetal myogenic cells can be successfully
isolated and expanded in vitro from human fetal muscle biopsies. Cells from a
16-week-year old fetus showed higher growth capacities when compared to
cells from 13 and 30 year old donors. This form of treatment is controversial due
to ethical issues regarding the use of fetal tissue “Hirt-Burri et al. (2008)”.
21
2. STEM CELL THERAPY
Different types of stem cells have been explored for the treatment of
DMD and the ideal scenario of a bone-marrow derived stem cell that circulates
to reach all muscles has proved clinically irrelevant to date “White and Grounds
(2003)”. Satellite cells represent the oldest known adult stem cell niche; they
reside beneath the basal lamina of skeletal muscle fibers and their two critical
properties are self-renewal and capacity to turn into various lineages of cells.
Satellite cells exhibit substantial phenotypic and functional heterogeneity,
evident through differences in their cell-surface marker expression, induction of
myogenic transcription factors, and in vivo and in vitro proliferation
characteristics “Rouger et al. (2004)”.
In late 1990s, were described cells likely to be more primitive than
satellite cells within muscle, nowadays called side population (SP) “Montanaro
et al. (2004)”. These cells demonstrated potential plasticity to myogenic and
hematopoietic lineages suggesting that to undergo myogenic commitment they
require the environment provided by myogenic cells “Asakura et al. (2002);
Camargo et al. (2003)”. They can be systemically delivered, intravenous or
intra-arterially, and then they extravasate from vessels into skeletal muscle,
engraft into muscle tissue and deliver their genetic material to host myofibers.
The mechanisms by which SP can extravasate from vessels and engraft in
skeletal muscle were studied and enhancement of progenitor cell engraftment
was achieved with intra-arterial SP transplantation “Perez et al. (2009)”.
Blood vessels were identified as a promising source of novel stem cells
called mesangioblasts. They can be delivered through blood and have a striking
capacity to form muscle and repopulate diseased skeletal muscles.
Mesangioblast therapy was studied in mice and in dogs with health
improvement of the dystrophic animals “Galvez et al. (2006); Sampaolesi et al.
(2006)” but in human treatment controversy still exists “Davies and Grounds
(2006)”.
A promising recent study showed that it is possible to transduce SP cells
from a dystrophic mouse with a lentiviral vector expressing human
microdystrophin, and reconstitute a few dystrophic fibers with the human protein
following intra-vascular delivery “Bachrach et al. (2004)”.
22
PPPHHHAAARRRMMMAAACCCOOOLLLOOOGGGIIICCCAAALLL TTTHHHEEERRRAAAPPPYYY
Presently supportive therapies are the main tool in reducing morbidity,
increasing quality of life and prolonging lifespan. Pharmacological approaches
involve the use of drugs/ molecules to improve the disease phenotype by
targeting specific components of the pathophysiology. Since the targets are
specific to a pathological defect, a combination of approaches is required which
enhance the probability of drug interactions and adverse effects.
1. ANTI-INFLAMMATORY DRUGS
A. Steroids
The relevant steroids in neuromuscular practice, prednisone/
prednisolone and deflazacort, have a predominant glucocorticoid action. They
showed potential for providing temporary improvement in two outcome
measures: prolongation of ambulation and enhancement of muscle strength and
function. Steroids demonstrated to stabilize muscle strength and function from
six months up to two years. Long-term pulmonary and cardiac benefits were
also reported but still need to be confirmed “Manzur et al. (2008)”.
Corticosteroids have a catabolic effect on muscle (non-exercised muscle)
preserving existing muscle fibers and reducing inflammation though, their exact
mechanism of action in dystrophic skeletal muscle is unknown. Several
possibilities based mainly on observations in mouse models were proposed and
include: differential regulation of genes in muscle fibers “Muntoni et al. (2002)”;
decrease in the number of cytotoxic/suppressor T cells “Kissel et al. (1991)”;
reduction of cytosolic calcium concentrations “Vandebrouck et al. (1999)”;
increasing laminin expression and myogenic repair “Anderson et al. (2000)”;
retarding muscle apoptosis and cellular infiltration “Kojima et al. (1999)”;
inhibition of muscle proteolysis “Rifai et al. (1995)”; protecting against
mechanically induced fiber damage “Jacobs et al. (1996)”; enhancing
dystrophin expression “Hardiman et al. (1993)”; shift the fiber type towards the
fast-twitch fibers “Fisher et al. (2005)”; increasing muscle levels of taurine and
creatine “McIntosh et al. (1998)”.
The first randomized, double-blind placebo controlled study on the use of
corticosteroids in DMD was reported in 1989. It compared a 6-month trial of
23
daily prednisone at doses of 0.75mg/kg and 1.5mg/kg where the 0.75 mg/kg
daily dose had the most favorable profile “Mendell et al. (1989)”. Later on, the
same group compared doses of 0.3mg/kg/day and 0.75mg/kg/day to placebo
and the lower dose of 0.3 mg/kg daily was less beneficial “Griggs et al. (1991)”.
Daily administration versus alternate day dosing was also studied and it was
found that daily dosing at 0.75mg/kg maintained the effects longer than
2.5mg/kg on alternate days “Fenichel et al. (1991)”.
Deflazacort is an oxazolone derivative of prednisone and the therapeutic
equivalence is about 1.2 mg deflazacort to 1.0 mg prednisone. A study
compared two treatment deflazacort protocols, one using 0.6mg/kg/day for the
first 20 days of the month and the other 0.9 mg/kg/day, determining the more
effective dose being 0.9 mg/kg/day. This study confirmed the long-term benefits
of deflazacort on mobility in both treatment protocols compared to boys not
treated with deflazacort. At the present deflazacort is only available in some
countries “Biggar et al. (2004)”.
Several comparison studies of prednisone and deflazacort have been
performed and one of the latest shows similar benefits to both treatments.
Deflazacort was also much more expensive and many families chose the
prednisone regimen. Regarding to side-effects, excessive weight gain was more
common with prednisone and asymptomatic cataracts with deflazacort “Balaban
et al. (2005)”.
Controversies still exist regarding to starting age of corticosteroids,
clinical criteria to start it, which corticosteroid, which dose and which regimen,
and when to discontinue corticosteroids. Immunizations schedule is generally
thought to be a reason to hold off initiating corticosteroids until 4 years of age.
Another reason is that under 2 years of age children are still gaining motor skills
making steroids unrecommended. Usually clinicians should propose initiation of
steroids at age 4–8 years, when a plateau phase (there is no longer progress in
motor skills and prior to decline) can be identified. Steroids are still advised
once a decline in motor skills is achieved but the benefits may be significantly
reduced “Bushby et al. (2010)”.
Systemic side-effects of steroid therapy in dystrophinopathies include
those commonly seen with chronic steroid use. There have been reports of the
following adverse effects: weight gain, behavioral changes, cushingoide
24
appearance, excessive hair growth, acne, osteoporosis/fractures,
hyperglycemia/glycosuria, hypokalemia, hypertension, gastrointestinal side-
effects, increased appetite, cataracts, sepsis and death “Manzur et al. (2008)”.
Maintenance of a daily schedule is appropriate when the child‟s motor function
is stable or in decline and if any corticoid side-effects are manageable and
tolerable. A regimen in alternate days is an option if unmanageable side-effects
develop in a daily dose regimen and they don‟t ameliorate with dose reduction.
In case of intolerable side-effects despite the regimen, a dose reduction of
approximately 25–33% is suggested and a clinical reassessment in 1 month is
necessary to determine whether side-effects have been controlled or not. If the
adjustments to dose and/or schedule regimens prove ineffective in making any
significant side-effects sufficiently manageable, then it is necessary to
discontinue therapy despite the state of motor function. Management for weight
gain should be accompanied by dietary advice and if obesity is of concern (>10-
20% over estimated normal weight for height over a 12-month period) switching
treatment from prednisone to deflazacort should be considered. Behavioural
changes should be supported by psychological input and advice on bone health
should be provided alongside with monitoring of fracture frequency. Vertebral
fractures can be treated with intravenous bisphosphonates under the guidance
of an expert in bone metabolism however there isn‟t sufficient evidence to
recommend the use of prophylactic oral bisphosphonates. Prophylaxis relies on
advice about calcium and vitamin D intake through diet and sunshine with
supplements of vitamin D3, if 25-hydroxy vitamin D is <32 nmol/L, and calcium
to reach an intake of 1000 mg/day. Concomitant treatment with non-steroidal
anti-inflammatory agents should be avoided and the use of antacids is
recommended in the presence of gastrointestinal complaints. Annual
ophthalmological examination and blood pressure/glucose intolerance
surveillance at each clinic visit are also advised “Manzur et al. (2008)” “Bushby
et al. (2010)”.
25
B. Other anti-inflammatory drugs
Other immunosuppressive drugs demonstrated benefits in mdx mice
leading to increasing recognition for the damaging role of inflammation in DMD.
Clinical trials on dystrophic muscle with the use of cyclosporine proved
beneficial through direct actions on skeletal muscle by inhibiting calcineurin and
ameliorating impaired mitochondrial metabolism. This demonstrated that
cyclosporine treatment significantly normalized many functional, histological,
and biochemical endpoints by acting on events that are independent or
downstream of calcium homeostasis. Muscle strength increased with a minimal
dose of 5 mg/kg/day, however, cyclosporine exerts multiple dose-dependent
effects and a correct dosage must be established especially when administered
to young dystrophic patients during muscle development “Sharma et al. (1993);
De Luca et al. (2005)”.
Another potential anti-inflammatory drug that has attracted attention is
the phosphodiesterases inhibitor pentoxifylline. Pentoxifylline is claimed to have
an anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidant and anti-fibrotic action; it reduces Tumor
Necrosis Factor-alpha (TNF-α) production in vitro, reduces fibrosis and may
also play a role in normalizing blood flow in dystrophic muscle. It was also
shown that pentoxifylline counteracts the abnormal activity of calcium channels
responsible for high sarcolemmal calcium permeability of dystrophic myofibers,
suggesting a possible amelioration of dystrophic condition through alternative
pathways. Despite this apparent modulation of many different targets, it was
proposed a unique mechanism of action residing in pentoxifylline ability to
inhibit specifically several isoforms of phosphodiesterases in different tissues.
Until now no significant side-effects were reported with the use of pentoxifylline
but, considering the function of phosphodiesterase enzymes and the key role of
cyclic nucleotides for modulating vital functions, it‟s important to use it carefully
with special attention to dose and administration routine “Burdi et al. (2009)”.
Oxatomide and cromolyn are other anti-inflammatory drugs that block
mast cell degranulation. They have shown benefits in mdx mice, indicating that
mast cell products, including tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), have
detrimental effects in dystrophic muscle. However, further studies must be
performed to corroborate this hypothesis “Granchelli et al. (2000); Radley and
Grounds (2006)”.
26
2. SPECIFIC ANTI-CYTOKINE DRUGS
A new approach involves the modulation of specific cytokines, which has
been very successful clinically in some severe inflammatory disorders. TNF-α is
a key pro-inflammatory cytokine that stimulates the inflammatory response and
its specific pharmacological blockade may reduce muscle necrosis. Satisfactory
results in dystrophic muscle were obtained with the use of two different
antibodies against TNF-α, infliximab and etanercept. In 2004, a study with
infliximab-treated mdx mice showed reduction in the onset, intensity of necrosis
and dystropathology “Grounds and Torrisi (2004)”. Later studies demonstrated
that etanercept reduced effectively plasma CPK with physiological benefits in
muscle strength and chloride channel function “Hodgetts et al. (2006); Pierno et
al. (2007)". This new strategy has the important benefit of few related side-
effects due to its target high specificity.
3. ANABOLIC PROCESSES STIMULATION
A. Myostatin regulation
Myostatin is a member of the Transforming Growth Factor-beta family
(TGF-β) and it‟s a potent, negative regulator of functional muscle mass.
Deletions of the myostatin gene cause muscle cell hypertrophy “Schuelke et al.
(2004)” and in the mdx mouse, blocking myostatin lead to an increase in body
weight as well as muscle mass, size and strength. Inhibition of the myostatin
gene by injecting blocking antibodies is predicted to improve the disease
phenotype in a variety of myopathies. In treated animals a significant reduction
in muscle fiber degeneration and serum CPK levels was observed but the exact
mechanism whereby myostatin improves muscle function is not yet known.
Studies showed that an increase in the expression of utrophin appears not to be
involved in the process “Bogdanovich et al. (2002)”.
B. Insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I)
IGF-I is an example of a positive regulator of muscle growth. Although
the presence of IGF-I can‟t correct the primary defect in muscular dystrophy, it‟s
possible that it can play an important role defending against the secondary
symptoms of the disease. Several different studies of normal muscle showed
27
that IGF-I is effective in increasing muscle mass and strength, promoting muscle
regeneration, and preventing apoptosis. It was also described that muscle-
specific IGF-I expression is beneficial to dystrophic muscle by preventing
fibrosis in addition to promoting functional hypertrophy. The combined effect of
enhanced repair and decreased wasting might lead to greater functional
capacity over time, where there is a reduction in the proportion of maximal effort
needed to produce a required force making the muscle less likely to be
damaged by normal activity. As so, the increased rate of muscle regeneration
may be a therapeutic alternative to replace the missing or defective dystrophin
complex member in the dystrophinopathies “Barton et al. (2002)”.
C. β2-agonists
Beta-2 adrenergic agonists were shown to induce muscle hypertrophy
and prevent atrophy after physical and biochemical insults in animals. A clinical
trial in a boy with DMD showed that albuterol produced a modest increase in
muscle strength without significant side-effects “Fowler et al. (2004)”. Recent
studies reported that formoterol has more powerful anabolic effects on skeletal
muscle than the older generation of β2-agonists, but inconsistency still exists
regarding to adverse effects of this therapy “Harcourt et al. (2007)”.
4. ANTIBIOTICS
Approximately 15% of DMD cases and most BMD cases are due to the
formation of a premature stop codon within the coding sequence of dystrophin.
Gentamicin is an aminoglycoside antibiotic that interferes with the ability of the
ribosome to recognize a given stop codon allowing translation to continue past
(suppress) a mutation in a given gene. This seems to be the only current
pharmacological strategy aiming to correct the primary defect. Gentamicin-
treated mdx mice showed both an increase in dystrophin expression, up to 10–
20%, and functional improvement. Protection against contractile injury was also
reported as a result of sarcolemmal dystrophin localization “Barton-Davis et al.
(1999)”. Concerning to human gentamicin trials, although an initial decrease in
CPK levels was noted, there was no increase in dystrophin expression as in
animal‟s results “Wagner et al. (2001); Dunant et al. (2003)”.
28
5. ANTI-PROTEASES
Dystrophin deficiency results in elevated Ca2+ influx and impaired Ca2+
homeostasis, which in turn activates calpain proteases that may account for
myofiber degeneration. A pioneer study suggested a potential therapeutic effect
with a new compound, BN 82270 (Ipsen), which is a membrane-permeable
prodrug of a chimeric compound (BN 82204) dually acting as calpain inhibitor
and anti-oxidant. It demonstrated increase in muscle strength, reduction in
serum CK and fibrosis of the mdx mice diaphragm “Burdi et al. (2006)”.
However, recent data showed that calpain enzymes perform only limited
proteolysis of target substrates being unlikely the predominant contributor of
muscle protein breakdown. Despite this, calpain enzymes play an important role
initiating the breakdown of myofibrillar proteins by releasing protein fragments
that become suitable substrates for the ubiquitin-proteasome system. Two
classes of muscle-cell permeating dual calpain/proteasome inhibitors were
developed and studied. Tripeptidic calpain/proteasome inhibitors showed
superior proteasome inhibition when compared to dipeptidic inhibitors as well as
higher potency in inhibiting cellular Ca2+-induced proteolysis induced by Ca2+
influx. Given their inhibitory activity and lower cellular toxicity, these compounds
have a potential benefit in dystrophinopathies “Briguet et al. (2008)”.
6. ANTI-OXIDANTS
Several findings suggest that oxidative stress might be involved in the
dystrophic process. Free radical injury may contribute to loss of membrane
integrity in muscular dystrophies and dystrophic muscle cells have an increased
susceptibility to reactive oxygen intermediates “Rodriguez et al. (2003)”.
Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10; also called ubiquinone) is a powerful
antioxidant and mitochondrial respiratory chain co-factor. Previous double blind
trials have shown some efficacy but further studies are needed. At the present a
phase III clinical trial is currently assessing the effect of CoQ10 (serum level
greater than 2.5 μg/ml) and prednisolone (0.75 mg/kg/day) in wheelchair-
dependent patients with DMD “http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/“.
Green tea polyphenols are also powerful antioxidants and along with its
active constituents may improve dystrophinopathies prognosis. In an
29
experiment varying concentrations of green tea extract were given to mice for
four weeks, beginning at birth. It was determined that the extract significantly
reduced the degradation of certain muscles and noted that higher doses
correlated with greater inhibition of decline. There was also biochemical
evidence that green tea extract reduced oxidative stress in muscle cells
“Dorchies et al. (2006)”.
It has also been suggested a role for nuclear factor (NF)-қB in muscle
degeneration. The effects of blocking NF-қB by inhibition of oxidative stress/lipid
peroxidation on the dystrophic process in mdx mice were studied using a strong
antioxidant and lipid peroxidation inhibitor, IRFI-042. It was shown that IRFI-042
reduced muscle necrosis and enhanced regeneration by blunting NF-қB DNA-
binding activity and TNF-α expression in the dystrophic muscles “Messina et al.
(2006)”.
7. PHARMACOLOGICAL UTROPHIN UP-REGULATION
The high degree of structural similarity between dystrophin and utrophin
led to the speculation that utrophin might be able to replace dystrophin in DMD
and reconstitute the dystrophin associated protein complex (DAPC) “Tinsley
and Davies (1993)”. Two promoters (A and B) have been described at the 5‟
end of the utrophin gene with utrophin A being the expressed one at the
neuromuscular junction; the expression of utrophin B is mainly confined to the
vascular endothelia “Weir et al. (2002)”.
The utrophin promoter A is transcriptionally regulated in part by
heregulin-mediated, extracellular signal-related kinase-dependent activation of
the GABPα/β transcription factor complex. Studies showed amelioration of
phenotype but not as dramatic as that reported by using transgenic means. Yet,
it has a fundamental advantage of obviating the immune and delivery problems
associated with germ-line modification and/or somatic gene therapy “Krag et al.
(2004)”.
Stimulation of Calcineurin is thought to increase extrasynaptic expression
of utrophin-A leading to restoration of DAPC and attenuation of the dystrophic
pathology “Chakkalakal et al. (2004)”.
30
Treatment of mdx mice with nitric oxide donors or substrates of nitric
oxide synthase (NOS) such as L-arginine increased the expression of utrophin
with concomitant morphological corrections of muscle. Neuronal nitric oxide
synthase (nNOS) catalyzes the production of nitric oxide and citrulline from the
substrate L-arginine. Studies show that the loss of nNOS is a major contributing
factor to many of the pathological changes in DMD “Voisin et al. (2005)”.
A recent work showed that the utrophin 5‟ end confers IRES (internal
ribosome entry sites)-mediated translational control during regeneration of
skeletal muscle fibers. Some viral and eukaryotic cellular mRNAs can be
translated via internal initiation making the stabilization of utrophin or the post-
transcriptional control of utrophin expression additional targets for therapeutic
intervention “Miura et al. (2005)”.
8. SUPPLEMENTS
Creatine is an “energy precursor” naturally produced by the body.
Transformed by the body into phosphocreatine, it enters muscle cells and
promotes protein synthesis while reducing protein breakdown. Data suggested
that supplemental creatine can improve muscle performance and strength,
decrease fatigue, and slightly improve bone mineral density. Glutamine is
involved in many metabolic processes and it is an important energy source for
many cells. A recent study showed inconclusive results but it couldn‟t exclude a
disease-modifying effect of creatine and glutamine in younger DMD “Escolar et
al. (2005)”.
Taurine is abundant in normal skeletal muscle and is believed to exert
both long- and short-term control over the functionality of ion channels.
Supplementation of taurine counteracts exercise-induced weakness after
chronic exercise and ameliorates macroscopic chloride conductance (an index
of degeneration-regeneration) in mdx mice muscles “De Luca et al. (2003)”.
A combination of creatine monohydrate, conjugated linoleic acid, alpha-
lipoic acid and betahydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate improved strength and
decreased fatigue in the mdx mice. This combination was better than any
individual supplement alone and the combination with prednisone provided the
best results “Payne et al. (2006)”.
31
9. MANAGEMENT OF COMPLICATIONS
A. Respiratory
Effective airway clearance is critical to prevent atelectasis and
pneumonia that can lead to respiratory failure and death. Cough peak flows
correlate directly to the ability to clear secretions from the respiratory tract and
the use of assisted cough technologies is recommended whether there‟s clinical
signs of ineffective clearance, the peak cough flow is less than 270 L/minute or
when maximal expiratory pressures are less than 60cm H2O. Mechanical
insufflation-exsufflation has shown to be more effective than manual
techniques.
Another major complication of dystrophinopathies is a sleep-disordered
breathing. The main recommendation is to use nasal continuous positive airway
pressure (CPAP) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome but without
nocturnal hypoventilation; and to use nasal intermittent positive pressure
ventilation (NIPPV) along with bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP)
generator or mechanical ventilator to treat sleep-disorder breathing and
nighttime hypoventilation. Avoidance of supplemental oxygen is crucial because
it can suppress respiratory drive and worsen the defect. Daytime ventilation
should be considered when measured PCO2 exceeds 50 mmHg or when
hemoglobin saturation remains < 92% while awake. Non-invasive techniques
like mouth-piece intermittent positive pressure ventilation are preferred but
tracheostomy remains an option when others are contraindicated “Finder et al.
(2004)”.
B. Cardiac
Dilated Cardiomyopathy (DCM) occurs in up to 90% of boys with DMD
aged ≥18 years. It becomes symptomatic only in a minority and it‟s the cause of
death in 20% of the cases. Recently, positive results were found with the use of
angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, mainly perindopril, and/or beta-
blockers in patients with early cardiomyopathy. However optimal timing for
introducing therapy for DCM remains undetermined “Bouhouch et al. (2008)”.
32
C. Orthopedic
The main goal in the treatment of DMD is to maintain ambulation for as
long as possible and to anticipate and manage the associated complications,
such as joint contractures and scoliosis. There are several physical
interventions recommended according to the stage of the disease.
i. Ambulant children: active, active-assisted or passive daily
stretching at the ankle, knee and hip are necessary to prevent contractures.
Moderate levels of active exercise, particularly hydrotherapy or swimming, are
recommended. Night ankle-foot-orthoses (AFOs) should be provided at the loss
of ankle dorsiflexion, when there is loss of normal grade of dorsiflexion and
before the foot can only achieve plantagrade. Daytime AFOs are not suggested
for ambulant children as they compromise their ability to walk. KAFOs (knee-
ankle-foot-orthoses) can be considered to delay contracture development and
prolong ambulation in the late ambulatory stage. Surgical lengthening of early
contractures is also an option and it has been performed in children as young
as 4-7 years. Surgical intervention is thought to prolong ambulation by 1 to 3
years “Eagle (2002); Bushby et al. (2010)”.
ii. Non-ambulant children: regular passive or active assisted
stretching are necessary, both in lower and upper extremities. Night and
daytime AFOs should be supplied as well as KAFOs (not well tolerated by night)
in order to prevent painful contractures and foot deformity. Surgical intervention
is only recommended to alleviate specific symptoms, such as pain and
pressure, since it‟s generally ineffective as a routine procedure to correct
deformities “Muntoni et al. (2006); Kinali et al. (2007)”.
iii. Management of scoliosis: Scoliosis usually manifests after
loss of walking, shows rapid progression coincident with the pubertal growth
spurt and has a negative impact on respiratory function, feeding, seating and
comfort. It has been showed that daily steroid treatment along with the use of
KAFOs reduces the risk of scoliosis “Kinali et al. (2007)”. Surgery is usually
scheduled once the Cobb angle measured on scoliosis films is between 20-40º
but the optimal timing for surgical intervention is while lung function is
satisfactory and before cardiomyopathy becomes severe enough to risk
arrhythmia under anesthesia “Muntoni et al. (2006)”.
33
CONCLUSION
Research into therapeutic strategies for dystrophinopathies has
progressed rapidly over the past decade. The development of practical gene-
and cell-based therapies is an ongoing process that is still in its initial stages. It
is only through additional investigation that the drawbacks of these promising
approaches will be overcome and ultimately lead to the development of
therapeutic strategies effective in stemming the progressive and multifactorial
nature of DMD. Until these therapies become clinically available, supportive
pharmacological treatments are the main weapons against the disease‟s
progression with rehabilitation playing a core role in reducing morbidity,
increasing quality of life and prolonging lifespan of affected children.
Finally, it is probable that dystrophinopathies with such a complex
pathogenesis will only be defeated by a multidisciplinary approach aimed to
replace or correct the mutated gene product as well as counteract the
devastating consequences of the primary mutation on muscle structure and
function.
34
REFERENCES
Aartsma-Rus A, Janson AA, Kaman WE, Bremmer-Bout M, van Ommen
GJ, den Dunnen JT, van Deutekom JC (2004). Antisense-induced
multiexon skipping for Duchenne muscular dystrophy makes more
sense. Am J Hum Genet. 74:83-92.
Abramovici H, Hogan AB, Obagi C, Topham MK, Gee SH (2003).
Diacylglycerol kinase-zeta localization in skeletal muscle is regulated by
phosphorylation and interaction with syntrophins. Mol. Biol. Cell
14:4499–4511.
Acsadi G, Dickson G, Love DR, Jani A, Walsh FS, Gurusinghe A, Wolff
JA, Davies KE(1991). Human dystrophin expression in mdx mice after
intramuscular injection of DNA constructs. Nature (London) 352:815–
818.
American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Cardiology and Cardiac
Surgery (2005). Cardiovascular Health Supervision for Individuals
Affected by Duchenne or Becker Muscular Dystrophy. Pediatrics
116:1569-1573.
Anderson JE, Weber M, Vargas C (2000). Deflazacort increases laminin
expression and myogenic repair, and induces early persistent functional
gain in mdx mouse muscular dystrophy. Cell Transplant 9:551–564.
Asakura A, Seale P, Girgis-Gabardo A, Rudnicki MA (2002). Myogenic
specification of side population cells in skeletal muscle. J. Cell Biol.
159:123–134.
Bachrach E, Li S, Perez AL, Schienda J, et al (2004). Systemic delivery
of human microdystrophin to regenerating mouse dystrophic muscle by
muscle progenitor cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101:3581–3586.
Balaban B, Matthews DJ, Clayton GH, Carry T (2005). Corticosteroid
treatment and Functional Improvement in Duchenne muscular dystrophy.
Long-term effect. American Journal of Physical Medicine and
Rehabilitation 84:843–850.
Barton ER, Morris L, Musaro A, Rosenthal N, Sweeney HL (2002).
Muscle-specific expression of insulin-like growth factor I counters muscle
decline in mdx mice. J. Cell Biol. 157:137–148.
35
Barton-Davis ER, Cordier L, Shoturma DI, Leland SE, Sweeney HL
(1999). Aminoglycoside antibiotics restore dystrophin function to skeletal
muscles of mdx mice. J. Clin. Invest.; 104:375–381.
Becker P (1953). Dystrophia Musculorum Progressiva. Stuttgart: Thieme.
Becker PE, Kiener F. Eine neue x-chromosomale Muskeldystrophie
(1955). Arch Psychiatr Nervenkr Z Gesamte Neurol Psychiatr. 193:427–
448.
Bertoni C, Jarrahian S, Wheeler TM, Li Y, Olivares EC, Calos MP, et al
(2006). Enhancement of plasmid-mediated gene therapy for muscular
dystrophy by directed plasmid integration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
103:419–424.
Bertoni C, Lau C, Rando TA (2003). Restoration of dystrophin expression
in mdx muscle cells by chimeraplast-mediated exon skipping. Hum Mol
Genet. 12:1087-1099.
Bertoni C, Morris GE, Rando TA (2005). Strand bias in oligonucleotide-
mediated dystrophin gene editing. Hum Mol Genet. 14:221-233.
Bertoni C, Rando TA (2002). Dystrophin gene repair in mdx muscle
precursor cells in vitro and in vivo mediated by RNA-DNA chimeric
oligonucleotides. Hum Gene Ther. 13:707-718.
Bertoni C, Rustagi A, Rando TA (2006). Enhanced level of gene
correction mediated by oligonucleotides containing CpG modification in
the mdx mouse model for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Am. Soc. Gene
Ther. 573 (abs.).
Biggar WD, Politano L, Harris VA, Passamano L, Vajsar J, et al (2004).
Deflazacort in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a comparison of two
different protocols. Neuromuscul Disord 14:476–482.
Bogdanovich S, Krag TO, Barton ER, Morris LD, Whittemore LA, et al
(2002). Functional improvement of dystrophic muscle by myostatin
blockade. Nature 420:418–421.
Bouhouch R, Elhouari T, Oukerraj L, Fellat I, et al (2008). Management
of cardiac involvement in neuromuscular diseases: review. Open
Cardiovasc Med J. 2:93-96.
36
Brenman JE, Chao DS, Xia H, Aldape K, Bredt DS (1995). Nitric oxide
synthase complexed with dystrophin and absent from skeletal muscle
sarcolemma in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Cell 82:743–752.
Briguet A, Erb M, Courdier-Fruh I, Barzaghi P, Santos G, Herzner H, et al
(2008). Effect of calpain and proteasome inhibition on Ca2+-dependent
proteolysis and muscle histopathology in the mdx mouse. FASEB J.
22:4190-4200.
Burdi R, Didonna MP, Pignol B, Nico B, Mangieri D, Rolland JF, et al
(2006). First evaluation of the potential effectiveness in muscular
dystrophy of a novel chimeric compound, BN 82270, acting as calpain-
inhibitor and anti-oxidant. Neuromuscular Disorders 16: 237–248.
Burdi R, Rolland JF, Fraysse B, Litvinova K, Cozzoli A, Giannuzzi V, et al
(2009). Multiple pathological events in exercised dystrophic mdx mice
are targeted by pentoxifylline: outcome of a large array of in vivo and ex
vivo tests. J Appl Physiol. 106:1311-24.
Bushby K, Bourke J, Bullock R, Eagle M, Gibson M, and Quinby J
(2005). The multidisciplinary management of Duchenne muscular
dystrophy. Current Paediatrics 15:292-300.
Bushby K, Finkel R, Birnkrant DJ, et al (2010). Diagnosis and
management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, part 1: diagnosis, and
pharmacological and psychosocial management. Lancet Neurol. 9:77-93.
Bushby K, Finkel R, Birnkrant DJ, et al (2010). Diagnosis and
management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, part 2: implementation of
a multidisciplinary care. Lancet Neurol. 9:177-189.
Camargo FD, Green R, Capetenaki Y, Jackson KA, Goodell MA (2003).
Single hematopoietic stem cells generate skeletal muscle through
myeloid intermediates. Nat. Med. 9:1520–1527.
Chakkalakal JV, Harrison MA, Carbonetto S, et al (2004). Stimulation of
calcineurin signaling attenuates the dystrophic pathology in mdx mice.
Hum Mol Genet 13:379-388.
Ciafaloni E, Fox DJ, Pandya S, et al (2009). Delayed diagnosis in
Duchenne muscular dystrophy: data from the Muscular Dystrophy
Surveillance, Tracking, and Research Network (MD STARnet). J Pediatr
155:380-385.
37
Clemens PR, Fenwick RG, Chamberlain JS, et al (1991). Carrier
detection and prenatal diagnosis in Duchenne and Becker muscular
dystrophy families, using dinucleotide repeat polymorphisms. Am J Hum
Genet. 49:951-960.
Davies K, Grounds MD (2006). Treating muscular dystrophy with stem
cells? Cell 127: 1304–6.
De Luca A, Nico B, Liantonio A, Didonna MP, Fraysse B, Pierno S, et al
(2005). A multidisciplinary evaluation of the effectiveness of cyclosporine
a in dystrophic mdx mice. Am J Pathol 166:477–489.
De Luca A, Pierno S, Liantonio A, Cetrone M, Camerino C, et al (2003).
Enhanced dystrophic progression in mdx mice by exercise and beneficial
effects of taurine and insulin-like growth factor-1. J Pharmacol Exp Ther.
304:453-463.
Dent KM, Dunn DM, von Niederhausern AC, Aoyagi AT, Kerr L, et al
(2005). Improved molecular diagnosis of dystrophinopathies in an
unselected clinical cohort. Am J Med Genetics134:295-298.
Dorchies OK, Wagner S, Vuadens O, Waldhauser K, Buetler TM, Kucera
P, et al (2006). Green tea extract and its major polyphenol (−)-
epigallocatechin gallate improve muscle function in a mouse model for
Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Am J Cell Physiol 290: C616–C625.
Duchenne G (1861). De l‟Electrisation Localisée et de son Application à
la Pathologie et à la Thérapeutique. Paris:Bailliére & Fils.
Dudley RW, Lu Y, Gilbert R, Matecki S, Nalbantoglu J, Petrof BJ, Karpati
G (2004). Sustained improvement of muscle function one year after full-
length dystrophin gene transfer into mdx mice by a gutted helper-
dependent adenoviral vector. Hum. Gene Ther. 15:145–156.
Dunant P, Walter MC, Karpati G, Lochmuller H (2003). Gentamicin fails
to increase dystrophin expression in dystrophin-deficient muscle. Muscle
Nerve 27: 624–627.
Eagle M (2002). Report on the muscular dystrophy campaign workshop:
exercise in neuromuscular diseases Newcastle, January 2002.
Neuromuscul Disord. 12:975-983.
Emery AE (1991). Population frequencies of inherited neuromuscular
diseases – a world survey. Neuromuscul Disord 1:19-29.
38
Emery AE. Duchenne muscular dystrophy, 2nd edn (1993). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Erazo-Torricelli R (2004). Updates in muscular dystrophies. Rev Neurol.
39:860-871.
Escolar DM, Buyse G, Henricson E, et al (2005). CINRG randomized
controlled trial of creatine and glutamine in Duchenne muscular
dystrophy. Ann Neurol 58:151–155.
Fabb SA, Wells DJ, Serpente P, Dickson G (2002). Adeno-associated
virus vector gene transfer and sarcolemmal expression of a 144 kDa
micodystrophin effectively restores the dystrophin-associated protein
complex and inhibits myofibre degeneration in nude/ mdx mice. Hum Mol
Genet 11:733–741.
Farini A, Razini P, Erratico S, Torrente Y, Meregalli M (2009). Cell based
therapy for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Cell Physiol. 221:526-534.
Fenichel GM, Mendell JR, Moxley RT 3rd, Griggs RC, Brooke MH, et al
(1991). A comparison of daily and alternate-day prednisone therapy in
the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Arch Neurol 48:575–
579.
Finder JD, Birnkrant D, Carl J, et al (2004). Respiratory care of the
patient with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: ATS consensus statement.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 170:456–465.
Fisher I, Abraham D, Bouri K, Hoffman EP, Muntoni F, Morgan J (2005).
Prednisolone-induced changes in dystrophic skeletal muscle. Faseb J
19:834–836.
Fowler EG, Graves MC, Wetzel GT, et al (2004). Pilot trial of albuterol in
Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy. Neurology 62:1006–1008.
Galvez BG, Sampaolesi M, Brunelli S, et al (2006). Complete repair of
dystrophic skeletal muscle by mesoangioblasts with enhanced migration
ability. J Cell Biol 174:231–243.
Gowers WR (1888). A manual of Diseases of the Nervous System. 378-
393.
Goyenvalle A, Vulin A, Fougerousse F, Leturcq F, Kaplan JC, Garcia L,
Danos O (2004). Rescue of dystrophic muscle through U7 snRNA-
mediated exon skipping. Science. 306:1796-1799.
39
Granchelli JA, Pollina C, Hudecki MS (2000). Pre-clinical screening of
drugs using the mdx mouse. Neuromusclular Disorders 10:235–239.
Griggs RC, Moxley RT, Mendell JR, Fenichel GM, Brooke MH, Pestronk
A, et al (1991). Prednisone in Duchenne dystrophy. A randomized,
controlled trial defining the time course and dose response. Clinical
Investigation of Duchenne Dystrophy Group.Arch Neurol 48:383–388.
Grounds MD, Torrisi J (2004). Anti-TNFα (Remicade) therapy protects
dystrophic skeletal muscle from necrosis. The FASEB J. 18:676–682.
Gussoni E, Blau HM, Kunkel LM (1997). The fate of individual myoblasts
after transplantation into muscles of DMD patients. Nat Med. 3:970-977.
Harcourt LJ, Schertzer JD, Ryall JG, Lynch GS (2007). Low dose
formoterol administration improves muscle function in dystrophic mdx
mice without increasing fatigue. Neuromuscul Disord 17:47-55.
Hardiman O, Sklar RM, Brown RH Jr (1993). Methylprednisolone
selectively affects dystrophin expression in human muscle cultures.
Neurology 43:342–345.
Hilton-Jones D (2001). Muscle diseases. In Donaghy, M. (ed.): Brain‟s
Diseases of the Nervous System. 11th ed. Oxford University Press 461–
506.
Hirt-Burri N, de Buys Roessingh AS, Scaletta C, Gerber S, Pioletti DP,
Applegate LA, Hohlfeld J (2008). Human muscular fetal cells: a potential
cell source for muscular therapies. Pediatr Surg Int. 24:37-47.
Hodgetts SI, Radley HG, Davies M, Grounds MD (2006). Reduced
necrosis of dystrophic muscle by depletion of host neutrophils, or
blocking TNFalpha function with Etanercept in mdx mice. Neuromuscular
Disorders 16:591–602.
Hoffman EP, Brown RH Jr, Kunkel LM (1987). Dystrophin: the protein
product of the Duchenne muscular dystrophy locus. Cell 51:919-928.
Hoffman EP, Fischbeck KH, Brown RH, Johnson M, Medori R, et al
(1988). Characterization of dystrophin in muscle-biopsy specimens from
patients with Duchenne's or Becker's muscular dystrophy. N Engl J Med.
318:1363-1368.
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/
40
Ikezawa M, Cao B, Qu Z, Peng H, Xiao X, et al (2003). Dystrophin
delivery in dystrophin-deficient DMDmdx skeletal muscle by isogenic
muscle-derived stem cell transplantation. Hum. Gene Ther. 14:1535–
1546.
Iwata Y, Katanosaka Y, Arai Y, Komamura K, Miyatake K, Shigekawa M
(2003). A novel mechanism of myocyte degeneration involving the Ca2+
- permeable growth factorregulated channel. J. Cell Biol. 161:957–967.
Jacobs SC, Bootsma AL, Willems PW, et al (1996). Prednisone can
protect against exercise-induced muscle damage. J Neurol 243:410–416.
Jiang Z, Schiedner G, Gilchrist SC, Kochanek S, Clemens PR (2004).
CTLA4Ig delivered by high-capacity adenoviral vector induces stable
expression of dystrophin in mdx mouse muscle. Gene Ther. 11:1453–
1461.
Khurana TS, Hoffman EP, and Kunkel LM (1990). Identification of a
Chromosome 6 encoded Dystrophin-Related Protein. J. Biol. Chem. 265:
16717-16720.
Kinali M, Main M, Eliahoo J, et al (2007). Predictive factors for the
development of scoliosis in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Eur J
Paediatr Neurol 11: 160–166.
Kissel JT, Burrow KL, Rammohan KW, et al (1991). Mononuclear cell
analysis of muscle biopsies in prednisone-treated and untreated
Duchenne dystrophy. Neurology 41:667–672.
Koenig M, Monaco AP, Kunkel LM (1988). The complete sequence of
dystrophin predicts a rod-shaped cytoskeletal protein. Cell 53:219-228.
Kojima S, Takagi A, Watanabe T (1999). Effect of prednisolone on
apoptosis and cellular infiltration in mdx mouse muscle. Rinsho
Shinkeigaku 39:1109–1113.
Krag TO, Bogdanovich S, Jensen CJ, Fischer MD, Hansen-Schwartz J,
et al (2004). Heregulin ameliorates the dystrophic phenotype in mdx
mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:13856-60.
Kumar A, Khandelwal N, Malya R, Reid MB, Boriek AM (2004). Loss of
dystrophin causes aberrant mechanotransduction in skeletal muscle
fibers. FASEB J.18:102–113.
41
Li H, Ding J, Wang W, Chen Y, Lu W, Shao H, Wu BL (2009). Combining
approach with multiplex PCR and MLPA to detect deletion and
duplication in DMD patients, carriers, and prenatal diagnosis. Chin J Med
Genetics 26:318-322.
Liang KW, Nishikawa M, Liu F, Sun B, Ye Q, Huang L (2004).
Restoration of dystrophin expression in mdx mice by intravascular
injection of naked DNA containing full-length dystrophin cDNA. Gene
Ther. 11: 901–908.
Manzur AY, Kuntzer T, Pike M, Swan A (2008). Glucocorticoid
corticosteroids for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Cochrane Database
Syst Rev. issue 3.
McClorey G, Fall AM, Moulton HM, Iversen PL, Rasko JE, Ryan M,
Fletcher S, Wilton SD (2006). Induced dystrophin exon skipping in
human muscle explants. Neuromuscul Disord. 16:583-590.
McIntosh L, Granberg KE, Briere KM, Anderson JE (1998). Nuclear
magnetic resonance spectroscopy study of muscle growth, mdx
dystrophy and glucocorticoid treatments: correlation with repair. NMR
Biomed 11:1–10.
Mendell JR, Kissel JT, Amato AA, King W, Signore L, et al (1995).
Myoblast transfer in the treatment of Duchenne's muscular dystrophy. N
Engl J Med. 333:832-838.
Mendell JR, Moxley RT, Griggs RC, Brooke MH, Fenichel GM, Miller JP,
et al (1989). Randomized, double-blind six-month trial of prednisone in
Duchenne‟s muscular dystrophy. N Engl J Med 320:1592–1597.
Messina S, Altavilla D, Aguennouz M, Seminara P, Minutoli L, Monici
MC, et al (2006). Lipid peroxidation inhibition blunts nuclear factor-
kappaB activation, reduces skeletal muscle degeneration, and enhances
muscle function in mdx mice. Am J Pathol. 168:918-26.
Meyron E (1851). On fatty degeneration of the voluntary muscles: report
of the Royal Medical and Chirurgical Society, Dec 9, 1851. Lancet 2:588-
89.
Miura P, Jasmin BJ (2006). Utrophin upregulation for treating Duchenne
or Becker muscular dystrophy: how close are we? Trends Mol Med.
12:122-129.
42
Miura P, Thompson J, Chakkalakal JV, Holcik M, Jasmin BJ (2005). The
utrophin A 5‟ UTR confers IRES-mediated translation control during
regeneration of skeletal muscle fibers. J Biol Chem 280:32997-33005.
Molnar MJ, Gilbert R, Lu Y, Liu AB, Guo A, Larochelle N, et al (2004).
Factors influencing the efficacy, longevity, and safety of
electroporationassisted plasmid-based gene transfer into mouse
muscles. Mol. Ther. 10:447–455.
Monani UR (2005). Spinal muscular atrophy: a deficiency in a ubiquitous
protein; a motor neuron-specific disease. Neuron. 48:885-896.
Montanaro F, Liadaki K, Schienda J, Flint A, Gussoni E, Kunkel LM
(2004). Demystifying SP cell purification: viability, yield, and phenotype
are defined by isolation parameters. Exp Cell Res. 298:144–154.
Mouly V, Aamiri A, Périé S, Mamchaoui K, Barani A, Bigot A, et al
(2005). Myoblast transfer therapy: is there any light at the end of the
tunnel? Acta Myol. 24:128-133.
Muntoni F, Bushby K, Manzur AY (2006). Muscular Dystrophy Campaign
Funded Workshop on Management of Scoliosis in Duchenne Muscular
Dystrophy 24 January 2005, London, UK. Neuromuscul Disord 16: 210–
219.
Muntoni F, Bushby K, van Ommen G (2005). 128th ENMC International
Workshop on 'Preclinical optimization and Phase I/II Clinical Trials Using
Antisense Oligonucleotides in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy' 22-24
October 2004, Naarden, The Netherlands. Neuromuscul Disord. 15:450-
457.
Muntoni F, Fisher I, Morgan J, et a (2002)l. Steroids in Duchenne
dystrophy: from clinical trials to genomic research. Neuromusc Disord
12:S162-165.
Neri M, Torelli S, Brown S (2007). Dystrophin levels as low as 30% are
sufficient to avoid muscular dystrophy in the human. Neuromuscul
Disord. 17:913–918.
Nirmalananthana N, Holton JL, Hanna MG (2004). Is it really myositis? A
consideration of the differential diagnosis. Current Opinion in
Rheumatology 16:684–691.
43
Oak SA, Zhou YW, Jarrett HW (2003). Skeletal muscle signaling pathway
through the dystrophin glycoprotein complex and Rac1. J. Biol. Chem.
278:39287–39295.
Odom GL, Gregorevic P, Chamberlain JS (2007). Viral-mediated gene
therapy for the muscular dystrophies: successes, limitations and recent
advances. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1772:243-262.
Parks RJ, Chen L, Anton M, Sankar U, Rudnicki MA, Graham FL (1996).
A helper-dependent adenovirus vector system: removal of helper virus by
Cre-mediated excision of the viral packaging signal. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA 93:13565–13570.
Partridge T (2002). Myoblast transplantation. Neuromuscul Disord. 12
Suppl 1:S3-6.
Payne ET, Yasuda N, Bourgeois JM, Devries MC, Rodriguez MC, Yousuf
J, et al (2006). Nutritional therapy improves function and complements
corticosteroid intervention in mdx mice. Muscle Nerve 33:66-77.
Perez AL, Bachrach E, Illigens BM, Jun SJ, Bagden E, Steffen L, et al
(2009). CXCR4 enhances engraftment of muscle progenitor cells. Muscle
Nerve. 40:562-572.
Pierno S, Nico B, Burdi R, Liantonio A, Didonna MP, Cippone V, et al
(2007). Role of TNF-a, but not of COX-2 derived eicosanoids, on
functional and morphological indexes of dystrophic progression in mdx
mice: A pharmacological approach. Neuropathology and Applied
Neurobiology 33:344-359.
Radley HG, Grounds MD (2006). Cromolyn administration (to block mast
cell degranulation) reduces necrosis of dystrophic muscle in mdx mice.
Neurobiology of Disease 23:387–397.
Rando TA (2007). Non-viral gene therapy for Duchenne muscular
dystrophy: progress and challenges. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1772:263-
271.
Rando TA, Disatnik MH, Zhou LZ (2000). Rescue of dystrophin
expression in mdx mouse muscle by RNA/DNA oligonucleotides. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U A. 97:5363-5368.
Reitter B, Goebel HH (1996). Dystrophinopathies. Semin Pediatr Neurol
3:99-109.
44
Rifai Z, Welle S, Moxley RT III, et al (1995). Effect of prednisone on
protein metabolism in Duchenne dystrophy. Am J Physiol 268:E67–E74.
Rodriguez MC, Tarnopolsky MA (2003). Patients with dystrophinopathy
show evidence of increased oxidative stress. Free Radic Biol Med
34:1217–1220.
Rouger K, Brault M, Daval N, Leroux I, Guigand L, et al (2004). Muscle
satellite cell heterogeneity: in vitro and in vivo evidences for populations
that fuse differently. Cell Tissue Res. 317: 319–326.
Sampaolesi M, Blot S, D‟Antona G, et al (2006). Mesoangioblast stem
cells ameliorate muscle function in dystrophic dogs. Nature 127:1304–6.
Schuelke M, Wagner KR, Stolz LE, Hubner C, Riebel T, et al (2004)
Myostatin mutation associated with gross muscle hypertrophy in a child.
N Engl J Med 350:2682–2688.
Sharma KR, Mynhier MA, Miller RG (1993). Cyclosporine increases
muscular force generation in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Neurology
43:527–532.
Simonds AK, Muntoni F, Heather S, Fielding S (1998). Impact of nasal
ventilation on survival in hypercapnic Duchenne muscular dystrophy.
Thorax. 53:949–952.
Skuk D, Goulet M, Roy B, Chapdelaine P, Bouchard JP, et al (2006).
Dystrophin expression in muscles of duchenne muscular dystrophy
patients after high-density injections of normal myogenic cells. J
Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 65:371-386.
Smith AE (1995). Viral vectors in gene therapy. Annu Rev Microbiol
49:807–838.
Tanveer N, Sharma MC, Sarkar C, Gulati S, Kalra V, Singh S, Bhatia R
(2009). Diagnostic utility of skin biopsy in dystrophinopathies. Clin Neurol
Neurosurg. 111:496-502.
Tinsley JM, Davies KE (1993). Utrophin: a potential replacement for
dystrophin? Neuromuscul Disord 3:537-539.
Turner PR, Fong PY, Denetclaw WF, Steinhardt RA (1991). Increased
calcium influx in dystrophic muscle. J. Cell Biol. 115:1701–1712.
45
Vainzof M, Passos-Bueno MR, Man N, Zatz M (1995). Absence of
correlation between utrophin localization and quantity and the clinical
severity in Duchenne/ Becker dystrophies. Am J Med Genet 58:305-309.
Vandebrouck C, Imbert N, Dupont G, Cognard C, Raymond G (1999).
The effect of methylprednisone on intracellular calcium of normal and
dystrophic human skeletal muscle cells. Neuroscience Letters 269:110–
4.
Voisin V, Sébrié C, Matecki S, Yu H, Gillet B, Ramonatxo M, Israël M, De
la Porte S (2005). L-arginine improves dystrophic phenotype in mdx
mice. Neurobiol Dis. 20:123-130.
Wagner KR, Hamed S, Hadley DW, Gropman AL, et al (2001).
Gentamicin treatment of Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy due
to nonsense mutations. Ann. Neurol. 49:706–711.
Wang B, Li J, Xiao X (2000). Adeno-associated virus vector carrying
human minidystrophin genes effectively ameliorates muscular dystrophy
in mdx mouse model. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:10158 –10163.
Weir AP, Burton EA, Harrod G, Davies KE (2002). A and B utrophin have
different expression patterns and are differentially up-regulated in mdx
muscle. J Biol Chem 277:45285-90.
Wells DJ, Wells KE, Asante EA, Turner G, Sunada Y, Campbell KP,
Walsh FS, Dickson G (1995). Expression of human full-length and
minidystrophin in transgenic mdx mice: implications for gene therapy of
Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Hum Mol Genet. 4:1245–1250.
White J, Grounds MD (2003). Harnessing the therapeutic potential of
myogenic stem cells. Cytotechnology 41:153–164.
Wilton SD, Fletcher S (2008). Exon skipping and Duchenne muscular
dystrophy: hope, hype and how feasible? Neurol India. 56:254-262.
Yang B, Jung D, Motto D, Meyer J, Koretzky G, Campbell KP (1995).
SH3 domain-mediated interaction of dystroglycan and Grb2. J. Biol.
Chem. 270:11711–11714.