Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of ozanimod in multiple sclerosis: Dose-blinded extension of a randomized phase II study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Ozanimod, an oral immunomodulator, selectively targets sphingosine 1-phosphate receptors 1 and 5.

Objective

Evaluate efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ozanimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis.

Methods

In the RADIANCE Part A phase II study (NCT01628393), participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis were randomized (1:1:1) to once-daily ozanimod hydrochloride (0.5 or 1 mg) or placebo. After 24 weeks, participants could enter a 2-year, dose-blinded extension. Ozanimod-treated participants continued their assigned dose; placebo participants were re-randomized (1:1) to ozanimod hydrochloride 0.5 or 1 mg (equivalent to ozanimod 0.46 and 0.92 mg).

Results

A total of 223 (89.6%) of the 249 participants completed the blinded extension. At 2 years of the extension, the percentage of participants who were gadolinium-enhancing lesion-free ranged from 86.5% to 94.6%. Unadjusted annualized relapse rate during the blinded extension (week 24-end of treatment) was 0.32 for ozanimod hydrochloride 0.5 mg → ozanimod hydrochloride 0.5 mg, 0.18 for ozanimod hydrochloride 1 mg → ozanimod hydrochloride 1 mg, 0.30 for placebo → ozanimod hydrochloride 0.5 mg, and 0.18 for placebo → ozanimod hydrochloride 1 mg. No second-degree or higher atrioventricular block or serious opportunistic infection was reported.

Conclusion

Ozanimod demonstrated sustained efficacy in participants continuing treatment up to 2 years and reached similar efficacy in participants who switched from placebo; no unexpected safety signals emerged.

SUBMITTER: Cohen JA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6681431 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of ozanimod in multiple sclerosis: Dose-blinded extension of a randomized phase II study.

Cohen Jeffrey A JA Comi Giancarlo G Arnold Douglas L DL Bar-Or Amit A Selmaj Krzysztof W KW Steinman Lawrence L Havrdová Eva K EK Cree Bruce Ac BA Montalbán Xavier X Hartung Hans-Peter HP Huang Vivian V Frohna Paul P Skolnick Brett E BE Kappos Ludwig L

Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) 20180725 9

<h4>Background</h4>Ozanimod, an oral immunomodulator, selectively targets sphingosine 1-phosphate receptors 1 and 5.<h4>Objective</h4>Evaluate efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ozanimod in relapsing multiple sclerosis.<h4>Methods</h4>In the RADIANCE Part A phase II study (NCT01628393), participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis were randomized (1:1:1) to once-daily ozanimod hydrochloride (0.5 or 1 mg) or placebo. After 24 weeks, participants could enter a 2-year, dose-blinded extension. ...[more]

PMID: 30043658

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients with multiple sclerosis (MS) experience relapses and sustained disability progression. Since 2004, the number of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for MS has grown substantially. As a result, patients, healthcare providers, and insurers are increasingly interested in comparative efficacy and safety evaluations to distinguish between treatment options, but head-to-head studies between DMTs are limited.ObjectiveThe aim of the current study was to compare efficacy and safety outcomes with the DMTs ozanimod and dimethyl fumarate (DMF) using a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) to adjust for cross-trial differences in study design and population.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed to identify clinical studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of ozanimod compared with DMF. Individual patient-level data (IPD) for ozanimod were obtained from the SUNBEAM and RADIANCE Part B trials, and aggregate-level patient data (APD) for DMF were obtained from CONFIRM and DEFINE. A MAIC is used to weight IPD to APD based on important baseline patient characteristics considered to be effect modifiers or prognostic factors in order to balance the covariate distribution to establish more homogenous trial populations. Once trial populations are determined to be sufficiently homogenous, outcomes of interest are estimated and used to generate treatment effects between the weighted IPD and APD. We used MAIC methodology to compare efficacy and safety outcomes of interest between ozanimod 1.0 mg once daily (OD) and DMF 240 mg twice daily (BID), including confirmed disability progression (CDP) at 3 and 6 months, annualized relapse rate (ARR), proportion of patients relapsed, overall adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and discontinuations due to AEs.ResultsAfter matching patient data, baseline patient characteristics were balanced between patients receiving ozanimod and those receiving DMF. Compared with DMF, ozanimod demonstrated significantly improved CDP at 3 months (hazard ratio 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-0.86), ARR (rate ratio [RR] 0.80; 95% CI 0.67-0.97), proportion of patients relapsed (odds ratio [OR] 0.66; 95% CI 0.52-0.83), overall AEs (OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.08-0.16), SAEs (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.19-0.39), and discontinuations (OR 0.11; 95% CI 0.07-0.17). CDP at 6 months did not differ significantly between the two agents (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.62-1.26).ConclusionsAfter adjustment of baseline patient characteristics, the MAIC demonstrated that the efficacy and safety of ozanimod 1.0 mg OD was superior to that of DMF 240 mg BID. Although a MAIC is less likely to produce biased estimates than a naïve or a standard indirect treatment comparison via a common comparator, limitations include potential confounding due to unobserved and thus unaccounted for baseline differences.

Project description:BackgroundThe low level of disease activity and manageable safety profile seen with fingolimod versus placebo in a 6-month, phase 2, randomized controlled trial in Japanese patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00537082) were maintained in the initial 6-month observational study extension. Here, we report long-term safety and efficacy results of the 3-year follow-up to the phase 2 study extension.MethodsThe 6-month core study was completed by 147 patients, of whom 143 entered the extension and took at least one dose of fingolimod. Those originally randomized to placebo were re-randomized to fingolimod 1.25 mg (n = 23) or 0.5 mg (n = 27). During the extension, the patients taking fingolimod 1.25 mg (n = 46) were switched to open-label fingolimod 0.5 mg, and those originally randomized to fingolimod 0.5 mg (n = 47) continued with open-label fingolimod 0.5 mg.ResultsContinuous fingolimod treatment was associated with a sustained low level of MRI and relapse activity for the duration of the extension phase; 75-100% (range across all assessment time points up to end of study) of patients remained free of Gd-enhanced T1 lesions, 88-100% remained free of new/newly enlarged T2 lesions, and 45-62% remained relapse-free. In patients who switched to the active treatment, a 79.5% decrease in annualized relapse rate (ARR; from 1.131 before switch to 0.232 6-months after switch) was observed in the first 6 months of the extension phase and thereafter remained low until the end of study (0.16-0.31 across all assessment time points after switch up to end of study). The mean number of Gd-enhanced T1 and new/newly enlarged T2 lesions decreased up to month 9 and thereafter remained low until the end of study (0.0-0.1 and 0.0-0.3, respectively, across all assessment time points after switch up to end of study). Fingolimod was generally well-tolerated and the safety profile was consistent with the core and 6-month extension. Serious adverse events were reported in 13.3% of patients during the extension study, with the range in the continuous fingolimod and placebo-fingolimod switch groups (3.7-21.7%) being similar to that reported in the core study for the placebo and fingolimod groups (5.3-20.4%).ConclusionContinuous fingolimod treatment over 36 months was associated with maintained efficacy and a manageable safety profile with no new safety signals. These results indicate that fingolimod provides long-term treatment benefit for Japanese patients with relapsing MS.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00670449 (April 28, 2008).

Project description:ObjectiveLow vitamin D status has been associated with multiple sclerosis (MS) prevalence and risk, but the therapeutic potential of vitamin D in established MS has not been explored. Our aim was to assess the tolerability of high-dose oral vitamin D and its impact on biochemical, immunologic, and clinical outcomes in patients with MS prospectively.MethodsAn open-label randomized prospective controlled 52-week trial matched patients with MS for demographic and disease characteristics, with randomization to treatment or control groups. Treatment patients received escalating vitamin D doses up to 40,000 IU/day over 28 weeks to raise serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] rapidly and assess tolerability, followed by 10,000 IU/day (12 weeks), and further downtitrated to 0 IU/day. Calcium (1,200 mg/day) was given throughout the trial. Primary endpoints were mean change in serum calcium at each vitamin D dose and a comparison of serum calcium between groups. Secondary endpoints included 25(OH)D and other biochemical measures, immunologic biomarkers, relapse events, and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score.ResultsForty-nine patients (25 treatment, 24 control) were enrolled [mean age 40.5 years, EDSS 1.34, and 25(OH)D 78 nmol/L]. All calcium-related measures within and between groups were normal. Despite a mean peak 25(OH)D of 413 nmol/L, no significant adverse events occurred. Although there may have been confounding variables in clinical outcomes, treatment group patients appeared to have fewer relapse events and a persistent reduction in T-cell proliferation compared to controls.ConclusionsHigh-dose vitamin D (approximately 10,000 IU/day) in multiple sclerosis is safe, with evidence of immunomodulatory effects.Classification of evidenceThis trial provides Class II evidence that high-dose vitamin D use for 52 weeks in patients with multiple sclerosis does not significantly increase serum calcium levels when compared to patients not on high-dose supplementation. The trial, however, lacked statistical precision and the design requirements to adequately assess changes in clinical disease measures (relapses and Expanded Disability Status Scale scores), providing only Class level IV evidence for these outcomes.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of ozanimod in multiple sclerosis: Dose-blinded extension of a randomized phase II study.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Efficacy and safety of ozanimod in multiple sclerosis: Dose-blinded extension of a randomized phase II study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets