Results don’t seal the fate of other VNS approaches
“As a properly controlled trial, the results are impressively negative,” writes Roy Fleischmann, MD, clinical professor of medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and codirector, Metroplex Clinical Research Center, both in Dallas, in an editorial about the study. Many of the previous studies looking at this therapy in RA were open label, which could bias the results, he argued. The biggest question, he noted, is if other blinded, sham-controlled trials looking at VNS devices will show similar results.
By itself, this finding does not imply that other VNS devices will be unsuccessful, argued Jonathan Kay, MD, the Timothy S. and Elaine L. Peterson chair in rheumatology, and professor of medicine and population and quantitative health sciences, UMass Chan Medical School and UMass Memorial Medical Center, both in Worcester, Mass. He is also an investigator for the RESET-RA trial, a randomized, sham-controlled trial that will assess the safety and efficacy of an implantable VNS device in an estimated 250 patients with RA. He was not involved with Dr. Baker’s work.
“Auricular VNS is delivered more distally than cervical or splenic nerve stimulation,” Dr. Kay said, and the potential effect of these other forms of VNS may have different outcomes.
Cynthia Aranow, MD, rheumatologist and director of the Clinical Autoimmunity Center of Excellence at Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York, agreed with Dr. Kay, noting that direct VNS stimulation via implantable device and transcutaneous stimulation through the skin are not comparable. She also is unaffiliated with the study.
“This group conducted a well-designed, sham-controlled study of a reasonable number of patients and over a reasonable period of time and observed no significant differences between those participants receiving true and those participants receiving sham stimulation,” she wrote in an email. “However, it’s important to point out that the stimulation settings used in this study were kHz (kilohertz) which is 1,000 times greater than the settings used in multiple other studies in which transauricular VNS has been shown to be clinically effective, including studies in long COVID, tinnitus, SLE, cluster headaches, erosive hand osteoarthritis, pediatric kidney disease, among others,” she said.
The role for VNS treatment, whether direct stimulation via implantable device or transcutaneous, in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases “remains to be determined by future studies,” she said.
The study was funded by Nesos. Dr. Baker received personal fees from Nesos during the study. Dr. Kay has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion Healthcare, and several other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Aranow reports no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.