4.1 Article

Effect of ceralifimod (ONO-4641) on lymphocytes and cardiac function: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with an open-label fingolimod arm

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 55, Issue 9, Pages 1051-1060

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcph.513

Keywords

pharmacodynamics; lymphocyte count; heart rate; sphingosine-1-phosphate

Funding

  1. EMD Serono, Inc., Rockland, Massachusetts, a subsidiary of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
  2. EMD Serono, Inc.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-arm, parallel-design study investigated cardiac and hematological pharmacodynamic effects of ceralifimod (ONO-4641), a selective sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulator, over a broad dose range in direct comparison with the nonselective S1P modulator fingolimod. Healthy subjects were assigned to ceralifimod (0.01, 0.025, 0.05, or 0.10mg), fingolimod (0.5mg), or placebo once daily for 14 days (n=24 per group). After 14 days of treatment, mean absolute lymphocyte count percentage change from baseline was greatest in the fingolimod (-62%) and ceralifimod 0.10mg (-56%) groups. On treatment cessation, lymphocyte recovery was faster in the ceralifimod versus the fingolimod group. Ceralifimod showed dose- and concentration-dependent chronotropic effect. Cardiac effects in the fingolimod group were dependent on fingolimod-P concentrations. Maximum mean heart rate (HR) effect on day 1 was larger with fingolimod (placebo-adjusted change from time-matched baseline HR [HR], -14.9 beats per minute [bpm]) versus ceralifimod (HR, -6.2 and -12.0 bpm for the 0.05- and 0.10-mg doses, respectively). Ceralifimod's effect on the PR interval was minor. Safety biomarker results suggest that potential therapeutic doses of ceralifimod, in particular the 0.05-mg dose, might result in reduced occurrence of bradycardia, atrioventricular block absolute lymphocyte count and grade 3/4 lymphopenia compared with fingolimod 0.5mg.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available