Background/Objectives: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a fatal, progressive neuromuscular disorder caused by mutations in the dystrophin gene, leading to the absence of functional dystrophin protein. As the largest gene in the human genome, the DMD locus is highly susceptible to mutations, contributing to a prevalence of approximately 1 in 3800–6300 live male births worldwide. This review aims to provide a comprehensive and critical synthesis of current and emerging therapeutic strategies for DMD. Methods: We conducted a narrative review of the literature, integrating findings from clinical trials, regulatory approvals, and preclinical studies. We categorized therapeutic approaches into mutation-agnostic and mutation-specific strategies, with emphasis on the mechanism of action, clinical progress, and translational limitations. Results: Current standards of care, including corticosteroids and supportive interventions, remain foundational in disease management. Mutation-specific approaches such as exon skipping and adeno-associated virus (AAV)-mediated gene replacement can restore dystrophin expression, although clinical benefit remains variable and is influenced by factors such as mutation type, delivery efficiency, and durability. Emerging genome editing strategies offer the potential for permanent correction but face significant challenges related to delivery, safety, and scalability. Emerging mutation-agnostic therapies targeting inflammation, fibrosis, and membrane instability provide broader applicability but do not directly address the underlying genetic defect. Across modalities, key limitations include modest functional outcomes, safety concerns, and variability in clinical trial endpoints. Conclusions: The DMD therapeutic landscape is rapidly evolving, and future progress will likely depend on optimizing delivery platforms, improving durability, and integrating combination strategies to address the multifaceted nature of disease progression.
Perez et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: