INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to systematically appraise and synthesize real-world data of motor function and safety in Asian patients with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) treated with nusinersen or risdiplam. METHODS: This study systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CNKI, and Wanfang databases for real-world studies (RWS) published from January 2017 to January 2024. Based on the prespecified study selection and eligibility criteria, RWS evaluating motor function and/or safety outcomes in patients with types 2-4 SMA treated with nusinersen or risdiplam were included, while studies without Asian populations were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the risk of bias, and a meta-analysis was conducted for each motor function endpoint based on the extracted data. RESULTS: A total of 26 RWS were included in this review, of which 17 reporting main motor function outcomes were included in the meta-analyses. Intervention in all 17 studies was nusinersen
none included risdiplam. Statistically significant improvement was observed in Revised Upper Limb Module (RULM) [Mean difference (MD) = 2.27 (0.84, 3.71)], Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale Expanded (HFMSE) [MD = 2.62 (1.79, 3.45)] and six-minute walk test (6MWT) [MD = 18.29 (9.12, 27.45)] when treated with nusinersen ≤ 6 months and >
6 months (HFMSE [MD = 4.34 (3.54, 5.14)]
6MWT [MD = 45.59 (12.92, 78.27)]). Clinically meaningful responses of motor milestones were also observed when treating nusinersen over 6 months: 54.4% (0.305, 0.772) for RULM, 53.0% (0.273, 0.779) for HFMSE and 97.1% (0.819, 1.000) for 6MWT. A total of 19 studies addressed safety outcomes. Reported adverse events were consistent with the expected safety profile for nusinersen. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that nusinersen is associated with a statistically significant and clinically meaningful motor function improvement in Asian patients with types 2-4 SMA in the real-world setting. No unexpected safety concern was observed for nusinersen. Motor function and safety outcomes after risdiplam could not be evaluated in this patient population under real-world settings due to limited studies.