MN 166 trial results

A board to discuss future MS therapies in early stage (Phase I or II) trials.

MN 166 trial results

Postby bromley » Tue Mar 27, 2007 6:17 am

Good to see brain volume being measured as part of the trial.

http://c.moreover.com/click/here.pl?j862501659&w=464753
User avatar
bromley
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1887
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:00 pm

Advertisement

Postby dignan » Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:52 am

Thanks for posting these results. I'm glad we're finally getting some phase II results flowing in. Unfortunately, these results appear to suck (see below). Annualized relapse rate and number of relapses didn't even achieve the standard for statistical significance. I wonder if they'll go ahead with a phase III, or if maybe they'll try to do a trial in combination with another drug.



March 27, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) - MediciNova today announced positive clinical findings from the 12-month core period of a Phase II clinical trial of MN-166 that measures both surrogate (radiological) and clinical outcomes over two years of treatment in 297 patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS).

The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial showed a significant increase in the proportion of patients who remained relapse-free over the first 12 months of treatment with 60 mg per day of MN-166 compared to placebo (p=0.03). The time to first relapse was also significantly increased in patients treated with 60 mg of MN-166 per day compared to placebo (p=0.04). Positive trends were also observed in the annualized relapse rate (p=0.08) and number of relapses (p=0.10) among patients who completed the full first 12 months of treatment with 60 mg of MN-166 per day compared to those patients completing the first 12 months of treatment on placebo.

A significant reduction in brain volume loss (p=0.04), as measured by cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, was observed in patients treated with 60 mg per day of MN-166 compared to placebo. Loss of brain volume on MRI has been shown to correlate with clinical progression and disability in MS patients. Positive trends were also observed in several other radiological outcome measures, including the volume of gadolinium-enhancing (T1) lesions (p=0.09) in patients treated with 60 mg of MN-166 per day compared with placebo. However, no reduction in the cumulative number of active (gadolinium-enhancing (T1) and non-enhancing new/enlarging (T2)) lesions on cranial MRI scans over 12 months of treatment was observed in patients treated with MN-166 compared to placebo, which was the protocol-defined primary endpoint of the study. No clinical or radiological benefit was observed in patients treated with 30 mg per day of MN-166. MN-166 was well tolerated at all doses in this trial. Eighty-nine percent of patients completed the first 12 months of the trial with only mild gastrointestinal side effects observed with MN-166 compared to placebo (3-6% vs. 1-3%, respectively).

The independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) has recommended that the trial continue beyond the first year of treatment without modification and was supportive of further clinical evaluation of MN-166 in MS patients.

"We are pleased with the benefit of MN-166 observed in MS patients in this trial; they confirm the results of previous pilot trials of MN-166 in MS patients conducted by Japanese academic investigators," said Yuichi Iwaki, M.D., Ph.D., Executive Chairman and CEO of MediciNova, Inc. "The divergence of clinical benefit and radiological findings suggest that MN-166 may be acting by a different mode of action than current treatments. We will carefully analyze the clinical data with our independent advisors to determine next steps in the development program and to advance this compound into Phase III clinical testing."

In July 2005, MediciNova initiated a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multi-center Phase II clinical trial of MN-166 in MS patients in five Eastern European countries. A total of 297 patients with at least one gadolinium-enhancing lesion on a screening visit MRI scan were randomized to receive placebo or one of two doses of MN-166 (30 or 60 mg per day) in this trial. Safety and efficacy assessments were performed at months 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 of the trial. Efficacy assessments were based on the evaluation of the cumulative number of active (gadolinium-enhancing (T1) and non-enhancing new/enlarging (T2)) cranial MRI lesions (the primary endpoint of the trial) and other MRI-related, exacerbation and disability-related endpoints (relapse rate and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score) after 12 months of treatment. Eligible patients who elected to continue their participation in the trial after 12 months of treatment will continue to receive treatment and will be assessed at months 13, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22 and 24 of the trial; patients who received placebo during the first 12 months of the trial were randomized to receive either 30 or 60 mg of MN-166 per day (double-blind maintained) during the second 12 months of the trial.
User avatar
dignan
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1608
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:00 pm

Postby CureOrBust » Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:49 am

The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial showed a significant increase in the proportion of patients who remained relapse-free over the first 12 months of treatment with 60 mg per day of MN-166 compared to placebo (p=0.03).


dignan wrote:Unfortunately, these results appear to suck (see below). Annualized relapse rate and number of relapses didn't even achieve the standard for statistical significance.
HUH? Sounds promising, even though lesions didn't appear to be improved. Is that what you were refering to, or did I miss something else?
User avatar
CureOrBust
Family Elder
 
Posts: 2924
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 2:00 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby mjs » Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:57 am

Effect on brain atrophy is MUCH more important that effect on relapses. The interferons reduce lesions and relapses, but don't seem to delay disability much at all. However, atrophy is directly linked to disability levels.

So this may well be a very promising treatment.

Does anyone have any idea what type of drug it is? Is it an immonsuppressant? A monocolonal antibody? (hope not).
User avatar
mjs
Family Member
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:00 pm

Postby dignan » Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:13 am

Cure,

I was refering to this bit:

"Positive trends were also observed in the annualized relapse rate ( p=0.08 ) (this one came out as an emoticon, but it was 0.08 ) and number of relapses ( p=0.10 ) among patients who completed the full first 12 months of treatment with 60 mg of MN-166 per day compared to those patients completing the first 12 months of treatment on placebo."


I could be wrong, but I think these measures were probably considered of greater import than time to first relapse.
User avatar
dignan
Family Elder
 
Posts: 1608
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:00 pm


Return to Drug Pipeline

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service