ClinicalTrials.gg
TerminatedNCT06308718Updated Nov 4, 2026

Long-term Follow-up Study to Evaluate Safety and Efficacy of FBX-101 in Krabbe Patients

An observational study in Krabbe Disease, sponsored by Duke University. Terminated at 1 site in United States. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-04.

Sponsored by Duke University · Observational

Why this study was terminated
The FBX-101 clinical program has been discontinued by Forge Biologics
Updated Nov 4, 2026Sponsor changed1 site added+1 moreGo to Updates ↓
Study type
Observational
Model
Other
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
2
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This is an observational study that will enroll any patients with Krabbe disease that have participated in prior interventional clinical trials involving the administration of FBX-101.

Read the detailed description

FBX-101-LTFU is a multicenter, non-interventional, Long-Term Follow-Up (LTFU) study of participants from prior interventional trials involving the administration of FBX-101. Eligible participants will undergo clinical evaluations at prespecified intervals for at least 3 years from the last visit in the prior clinical trial (up to 5 years post-FBX-101 treatment). Overall safety and additional signs of efficacy will be collected with a series of laboratory tests, diagnostic tests, and performance surveys. Additionally, children participating in interventional trials that are terminated early will be transferred to this LTFU study and will complete any pending visits from the interventional trial before starting the clinical evaluations included in this protocol.

02

Conditions studied

  • Krabbe Disease

Keywords

  • Lysosomal Storage Disorder
  • Globoid Cell Leukodystrophy
  • Leukodystrophy
  • GALC
03

In context

Leukodystrophy, Globoid Cell

31 studies on the registry are indexed under Leukodystrophy, Globoid Cell; 8 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 2 is below the median of 55 across 14 observational studies indexed under Leukodystrophy, Globoid Cell.

Browse Leukodystrophy, Globoid Cell studies →

Lead sponsor

Duke University is the lead sponsor of 2,063 studies on the registry; 273 are open to participants now.

Of its 204 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 167 (82%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

This is an observational long-term follow-up (LTFU) study of participants from prior interventional trials involving the administration of FBX-101.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Participants that have completed a prior clinical trial involving the administration of FBX-101.
  • Parent(s)/legal guardian(s) of participant willing and able to complete the process and comply with study procedures and visit schedule.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

•Planned or current participation in any other interventional clinical study that may confound the safety or efficacy evaluation of FBX-101 during this study.

Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

05

Study design

Observational model
Other
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
2 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No
Biospecimen retention
Samples with dna

Groups and cohorts

  • Patients enrolled in the FBX-101-LTFU study

    The participants will be followed for 36 months after they have concluded their participation in the interventional trial. They will complete 5 scheduled visits with assessments as specified in the schedule of assessments, to collect data for safety and additional signs of efficacy for FBX-101. Those patients enrolled from any other early terminated trial, will first complete pending evaluations from that trial.

    Biological: FBX-101

Interventions

  • BiologicalFBX-101

    A replication-deficient adeno-associated virus gene transfer vector expressing the human galactocerebrosidase (hGALC) cDNA will be delivered one-time through a venous catheter inserted into a peripheral limb vein.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Long Term safety as assessed by incidence of Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) and Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) that are attributed to FBX-101

    Time frame: 36 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Efficacy as assessed by change of gross motor function measured longitudinally by Peabody Developmental Motor Scale (PDMS-2)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  2. Efficacy as assessed by change of gross motor function measured longitudinally by Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOT-2)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  3. Efficacy as assessed by change of gross motor function measured longitudinally by Gross Motor Function Measure 88 (GMFM-88)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  4. Efficacy as assessed by change of fine motor function measured longitudinally by Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  5. Efficacy as assessed by change of fine motor function measured longitudinally by Beery VMI Sixth Edition (VMI)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  6. Efficacy as assessed by change of fine motor function measured longitudinally by Bayley Scales of Infant Development (Bayley-III)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  7. Efficacy as assessed by change of fine motor function measured longitudinally by Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale (Vineland 3)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  8. Efficacy as assessed by change of cognitive function measured longitudinally by Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  9. Efficacy as assessed by change of cognitive function measured longitudinally by the Differential Ability Scale II (DAS-II)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  10. Efficacy as assessed by change of cognitive function measured longitudinally by Bayley Scales of Infant Development (Bayley-III)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  11. Efficacy as assessed by change of adaptive behaviour function measured longitudinally by Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale (Vineland 3).

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  12. Efficacy as assessed by change of language function measured longitudinally by Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL).

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  13. Efficacy as assessed by change of language function measured longitudinally by Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals Fifth Edition (CELF-5)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  14. Efficacy as assessed by change of language function measured longitudinally by Bayley Scales of Infant Development (Bayley-III)

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  15. Efficacy as assessed by change of language function measured longitudinally by Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale (Vineland 3).

    The site is providing raw data and sponsor is calculating derived scores according to specific manual. Higher values will mean better outcome.

    Time frame: 36 months

  16. Efficacy as assessed by change of quality of life measured longitudinally by the Pediatric Quality of Life (PedsQL) Generic Core Scales with Family Impact Module and Multidimensional Fatigue Scale

    Time frame: 36 months

  17. Efficacy as assessed by change of developmental milestones such as language and motor skills as measured longitudinally by an specific Developmental Milestones questionnaire

    Time frame: 36 months

  18. Efficacy as assessed by change of hearing function measured longitudinally by Auditory Brainstem Responses (ABRs)

    Absolute values for Waves I, III and V in milliseconds will be recorded along interpretation and waveform morphology; and also Auditory Brainstem Responses (corrected).

    Time frame: 36 months

  19. Efficacy as assessed by change of hearing function measured longitudinally by Behavior Audiometry (BAUD)

    Time frame: 36 months

  20. Efficacy as assessed by change of peripheral nerve conduction velocity measured longitudinally by Nerve Conduction Velocity (NCV) assessments

    Time frame: 36 months

  21. Efficacy as assessed by change of Fractional Anisotropy (FA) as measured longitudinally by brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) with Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI)

    Time frame: 36 months

  22. Efficacy as assessed by change of visual function as measured longitudinally by visual evoked potentials (VEP)

    Time frame: 36 months

  23. Efficacy as assessed by change of visual function as measured longitudinally by visual acuity

    Time frame: 36 months

  24. Efficacy as assessed by change of whole blood donor chimerism

    Time frame: 36 months

  25. Efficacy as assessed by change of psychosine in whole blood and plasma

    Time frame: 36 months

  26. Efficacy as assessed by change of Galactosylceramidase (GALC) levels in plasma and Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF)

    Time frame: 36 months

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Duke University
    Durham, North Carolina 27705, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Bascou N, DeRenzo A, Poe MD, Escolar ML. A prospective natural history study of Krabbe disease in a patient cohort with onset between 6 months and 3 years of life. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2018 Aug 9;13(1):126. doi: 10.1186/s13023-018-0872-9. PubMed 30089515 ↗
  • Beltran-Quintero ML, Bascou NA, Poe MD, Wenger DA, Saavedra-Matiz CA, Nichols MJ, Escolar ML. Early progression of Krabbe disease in patients with symptom onset between 0 and 5 months. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019 Feb 18;14(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s13023-019-1018-4. PubMed 30777126 ↗
  • Escolar ML, Poe MD, Provenzale JM, Richards KC, Allison J, Wood S, Wenger DA, Pietryga D, Wall D, Champagne M, Morse R, Krivit W, Kurtzberg J. Transplantation of umbilical-cord blood in babies with infantile Krabbe's disease. N Engl J Med. 2005 May 19;352(20):2069-81. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa042604. PubMed 15901860 ↗
  • Yoon IC, Bascou NA, Poe MD, Szabolcs P, Escolar ML. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for late-infantile Krabbe disease. Blood. 2021 Apr 1;137(13):1719-1730. doi: 10.1182/blood.2020005477. PubMed 33150395 ↗
  • Wright MD, Poe MD, DeRenzo A, Haldal S, Escolar ML. Developmental outcomes of cord blood transplantation for Krabbe disease: A 15-year study. Neurology. 2017 Sep 26;89(13):1365-1372. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000004418. Epub 2017 Aug 30. PubMed 28855403 ↗
  • Gupta A, Poe MD, Styner MA, Panigrahy A, Escolar ML. Regional differences in fiber tractography predict neurodevelopmental outcomes in neonates with infantile Krabbe disease. Neuroimage Clin. 2014 Sep 26;7:792-8. doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2014.09.014. eCollection 2015. PubMed 25844309 ↗
  • Bradbury AM, Bagel J, Swain G, Miyadera K, Pesayco JP, Assenmacher CA, Brisson B, Hendricks I, Wang XH, Herbst Z, Pyne N, Odonnell P, Shelton GD, Gelb M, Hackett N, Szabolcs P, Vite CH, Escolar M. Combination HSCT and intravenous AAV-mediated gene therapy in a canine model proves pivotal for translation of Krabbe disease therapy. Mol Ther. 2024 Jan 3;32(1):44-58. doi: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2023.11.014. Epub 2023 Nov 11. PubMed 37952085 ↗
  • Siddiqi ZA, Sanders DB, Massey JM. Peripheral neuropathy in Krabbe disease: effect of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Neurology. 2006 Jul 25;67(2):268-72. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000230156.01228.33. PubMed 16864820 ↗
  • Vander Lugt MT, Chen X, Escolar ML, Carella BA, Barnum JL, Windreich RM, Hill MJ, Poe M, Marsh RA, Stanczak H, Stenger EO, Szabolcs P. Reduced-intensity single-unit unrelated cord blood transplant with optional immune boost for nonmalignant disorders. Blood Adv. 2020 Jul 14;4(13):3041-3052. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020001940. PubMed 32634238 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
Sites
1 site added, 1 site removed
Show site
  • Duke University · Durham, United States
Show 1 removed
  • University of Michigan Hospitals - Michigan Medicine · Ann Arbor, United States
Nov 4, 2026
Sponsor
Forge Biologics, Inc→Duke University
Nov 4, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Nov 4, 2026
    1 site added, 1 site removed
    Show site
    • Duke University · Durham, United States
    Show 1 removed
    • University of Michigan Hospitals - Michigan Medicine · Ann Arbor, United States
    Sponsor Forge Biologics, Inc→Duke University
    + 1 other change: identifiers

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06308718
Lead sponsor
Duke University
Responsible party
Joanne Kurtzberg, MD (Jerome Harris Distinguished Professor of Pediatrics Professor of Pathology Director, Marcus Center for Cellular Cures Director, Carolinas Cord Blood Bank Director, Stem Cell Transplant Laboratory President, Cord Blood Association, Duke University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 13, 2024
Start date
Aug 6, 2024
Primary completion
Apr 10, 2025
Completion
Apr 11, 2025
Last update
Nov 4, 2026

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is terminated, as verified in Aug 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion