↓ Skip to main content

Riluzole in patients with hereditary cerebellar ataxia: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Lancet Neurology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge
32

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
29 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
105 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
Riluzole in patients with hereditary cerebellar ataxia: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
Published in
Lancet Neurology, October 2015
DOI 10.1016/s1474-4422(15)00201-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Silvia Romano, Giulia Coarelli, Christian Marcotulli, Luca Leonardi, Francesca Piccolo, Maria Spadaro, Marina Frontali, Michela Ferraldeschi, Maria Chiara Vulpiani, Federica Ponzelli, Marco Salvetti, Francesco Orzi, Antonio Petrucci, Nicola Vanacore, Carlo Casali, Giovanni Ristori

Abstract

Our previous study in patients with cerebellar ataxias of different causes showed significant benefit of riluzole after 8 weeks. We aimed to confirm these results in patients with spinocerebellar ataxia or Friedreich's ataxia in a 1-year trial. Patients with spinocerebellar ataxia or Friedreich's ataxia (2:1 ratio) from three Italian neurogenetic units were enrolled in this multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, and randomly assigned to riluzole (50 mg orally, twice daily) or placebo for 12 months. The randomisation list was computer-generated and a centralised randomisation system was implemented. Participants and assessing neurologists were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with improved Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA) score (a drop of at least one point) at 12 months. An intention-to-treat analysis was done. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01104649. Between May 22, 2010, and Feb 25, 2013, 60 patients were enrolled. Two patients in the riluzole group and three in the placebo group withdrew their consent before receiving treatment, so the intention-to-treat analysis was done on 55 patients (19 with spinocerebellar ataxia and nine with Friedreich's ataxia in the riluzole group, and 19 with spinocerebellar ataxia and eight with Friedreich's ataxia in the placebo group). The proportion with decreased SARA score was 14 (50%) of 28 patients in the riluzole group versus three (11%) of 27 in the placebo group (OR 8·00, 95% CI 1·95-32·83; p=0·002). No severe adverse events were recorded. In the riluzole group, two patients had an increase in liver enzymes (less than two times above normal limits). In two participants in the riluzole group and two participants in the placebo group, sporadic mild adverse events were reported. Our findings lend support to the idea that riluzole could be a treatment for cerebellar ataxia. Longer studies and disease-specific trials are needed to confirm whether these findings can be applied in clinical practice. Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Italy 2 2%
China 1 1%
Unknown 95 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 15%
Student > Master 13 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 9%
Other 8 8%
Other 24 24%
Unknown 15 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 25%
Neuroscience 20 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 6%
Psychology 6 6%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 23 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 25 August 2016.
All research outputs
#686,129
of 16,028,717 outputs
Outputs from Lancet Neurology
#486
of 2,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,307
of 241,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lancet Neurology
#14
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,028,717 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
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 241,139 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.