4.7 Article

A phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of MBP8298 in secondary progressive MS

Journal

NEUROLOGY
Volume 77, Issue 16, Pages 1551-1560

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e318233b240

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. BioMS Medical Corp.
  2. Merck Serono
  3. Novartis
  4. sanofi-aventis
  5. Bayer Schering Pharma
  6. Genzyme Corporation
  7. EMD Serono, Inc.
  8. BioMS Medical
  9. Bayhill Therapeutics
  10. Biogen Idec
  11. Genentech, Inc.
  12. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
  13. Bayer Schering Pharma/Berlex
  14. Christopher Foundation
  15. MS Society of Canada
  16. CIHR
  17. Lotte Hecht Foundation
  18. Vancouver Hospital Foundation
  19. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  20. Lundbeck Inc.
  21. Elan Corporation
  22. Motor Neurone Disease Association
  23. British Polio Fellowship
  24. Swedish Research Council
  25. EU FP6
  26. Soderbergs Foundation
  27. Bibbi and Nils Jensens Foundation
  28. Montel Williams Foundation
  29. Swedish Brain foundation
  30. MRC [G0501747] Funding Source: UKRI
  31. Medical Research Council [G0501747] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of MBP8298 in subjects with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) who express human leukocyte antigen (HLA) haplotype DR2 or DR4 (DR2(+) or DR4(+)). Methods: This multicenter randomized 2-year, double-blind, placebo-controlled study included 612 subjects with a diagnosis of SPMS and an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 3.5-6.5, stratified according to baseline EDSS score (3.5-5.0, or 5.5-6.5) and HLA haplotype (DR2(+) or DR4(+), or DR2(-)/DR4(-)). Upon entry of 100 DR2(-)/DR4(-) subjects, further study enrollment was limited to DR2(+) or DR4(+) subjects. Subjects were randomly assigned to either 500 mg MBP8298 or placebo, given by IV injection once every 6 months for 2 years. The primary outcome measure was time to progression by >= 1.0 EDSS point (or 0.5 point if baseline EDSS was 5.5 or higher), confirmed 6 months later. Secondary outcomes included mean change in EDSS, mean change in Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite, MRI changes, annualized relapse rate, and quality of life. Results: There were no significant differences between treatment groups in either the primary or secondary endpoints. MBP8298 was well tolerated in all treated subjects with no safety issues identified. Conclusion: In the population studied, treatment with MBP8298 did not provide a clinical benefit compared to placebo. Classification of evidence: This study provides Class 1 evidence that MBP8298 is not effective in patients with SPMS who are HLA DR2(+) or DR4(+). Neurology (R) 2011;77:1551-1560

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available