Updated December 28, 2020
Since our review was published, a more definitive trial of NP001 was conducted. This failed to show any benefit in slowing ALS progression. We therefore change our NP001 Trials grade from C to D. We would still like to see additional studies of the WF10 form of sodium chlorite.
Updated April 25, 2022
We found no new studies establishing a plausible mechanism or any promise as an ALS treatment. Given this lack of data, and the risks we previously wrote about, we cannot endorse this as a promising ALS treatment.
Key Information
Click on any letter grade below for more info:
Preclinical Trials Grade:
U
Published: Jan 2013
The NP001 formulation of sodium chlorite acts through a plausible mechanism and preliminary data suggest that it is safe and may slow ALS progression in some PALS. The WF10 formulation of SC appears to act through this same mechanism. Although WF10 is available for off-label use, it is very expensive, may have more side-effects than NP001, and at this time has only scant anecdotal evidence for efficacy in PALS. ALSUntangled supports further carefully monitored studies of NP001 and WF10 in PALS. In contrast, oral sodium chlorite has potentially dangerous and toxic side-effects may hasten disease progression, and is not clearly absorbed from the gut. We do not recommend further use of oral sodium chlorite unless it can at least be shown to be safe and to act on mechanisms in humans that are relevant to ALS.
Grade A: Shown in a peer-reviewed publication to act on a relevant mechanism in humans
Grade B: Shown in a peer-reviewed publication to act on a relevant mechanism in pre-clinical model(s)
Grade C: Theoretically and plausibly acts on an ALS-relevant mechanism in humans
Grade D: Acts on a biological mechanism but it is not clear that this mechanism is relevant in ALS
Grade F: Implausible; would violate known principles or laws of biology
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Grade A: Two or more peer-reviewed publications reporting benefits in well-designed studies.
Animal studies are assumed to be ‘well designed’ when they follow published guidelines. When they deviate from these they are considered ‘flawed’.
Grade B: One peer-reviewed publication reporting benefits in a well-designed study.
Animal studies are assumed to be ‘well designed’ when they follow published guidelines. When they deviate from these they are considered ‘flawed’.
Grade C: One or more peer-reviewed publication(s) reporting benefits in flawed studies.
Animal studies are assumed to be ‘well designed’ when they follow published guidelines. When they deviate from these they are considered ‘flawed’.
Grade D: One or more non-peer reviewed studies reporting benefits (published on a website or in an abstract)
Grade F: The only studies available show no benefit
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Grade A: One or more peer-reviewed publications reporting benefits with validated diagnosis and benefits
Grade B: More than one unpublished report of benefit with validated diagnosis and benefits
Grade C: One unpublished report of benefit with validated diagnosis and benefits
Grade D: Subjective report(s) of benefit without validated diagnoses and/or benefits
Grade F: The only reports available show no benefit
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Two or more peer-reviewed publications describing benefits in well-designed randomized, blinded placebo-controlled phase III trials
Grade C: One or more peer-reviewed publications reporting benefits in a well-designed randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled phase I or II trial
Grade D: One or more peer-reviewed publications reporting benefits in a flawed trial.
Flawed trials means those in which there are identifiable problems with patient selection, randomization, blinding, controls or follow-up. These have ‘high or unclear risk of bias’ according to published criteria. Well-designed trials are those that have ‘low risk of bias’.
Grade F: The only trials available show no benefit
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Grade A: No exposed patients appear to have experienced harms
Grade B: More than 0% but less than 10% of exposed patients experienced harms (no hospitalizations or deaths)
Grade B (oral): More than 0% but less than10% of exposed patients experienced harms (no hospitalizations or deaths)
Grade D (intravenous): More than 0% but less than 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalizations
Grade C: At least 10% of exposed patients experienced harms (no hospitalizations or deaths)
Grade D: More than 0% but less than 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalizations
Grade D: More than 0% but less than 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalizations
Grade F: At least 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalization
Grade F: At least 5% of exposed patients experienced death or hospitalization
Grade U: No useful information was found for this category
Listen to the Podcast
Listen on Spreaker
