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

43Citations
Citations of this article
102Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cohen, J. A., Comi, G., Arnold, D. L., Bar-Or, A., Selmaj, K. W., Steinman, L., … Kappos, L. (2019). Efficacy and safety of ozanimod in multiple sclerosis: Dose-blinded extension of a randomized phase II study. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 25(9), 1255–1262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458518789884

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free