Multifocal Motor Neuropathy (MMN)
Conditions
Brief summary
The objective of this study is to assess efficacy, safety, and convenience of purified human antibodies administered under the skin in the treatment of MMN patients.
Interventions
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Patients with documented clinical diagnosis and electrophysiological evidence of MMN * Patients who have previously responded to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and have been on stable treatment with IVIG for at least 12 weeks prior to screening * Patients treated with the equivalent of ≥0.4g/kg body weight (bw) IVIG per month * Provision of informed consent by patient
Exclusion criteria
* Aspartate aminotransferase (ASAT) or alanine aminotransferase (ALAT) concentration \>2.5 times the upper normal limit (UNL) * Creatinine concentration \>1.5 times the UNL * Known allergic reactions to blood products * Any skin disease interfering with the assessment of injection site reactions * Any other medical condition, which in the opinion of the investigator, might interfere with successful completion of the protocol * Any condition likely to interfere with the evaluation of the study drug or satisfactory conduct of the trial * Participation in a study with an investigational drug within three months prior to enrolment * Patients treated with the equivalent of \>2.0g/kg bw IVIG per month
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Muscle Strength | Baseline to week 24 | The change in Medical Research Council (MRC) score was determined at week 24 compared to baseline using descriptive statistics and nonparametric, two-sided 95% confidence intervals based on the Hodges-Lehmann method. Data for one of the eight subjects was from week 13 as week 24 data were not available. The 200-point MRC sum score is the sum of scores for 20 bilateral (left and right side) muscle groups, each rated between 0 (no movement) to 5 (normal movement/power). A higher MRC sum score indicates greater muscle contraction/limb movement. Positive values for change in MRC sum score indicate improvement, with a more positive value indicating greater muscle contraction/ limb movement compared with the value at baseline. |
| Mean Overall MRC Score at Baseline and Week 24 | Baseline and week 24 | The 200-point MRC sum score is the sum of scores for 20 bilateral (left and right side) muscle groups, each rated between 0 (no movement) to 5 (normal movement/power). A higher MRC sum score indicates greater muscle contraction/limb movement. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline to the Completion Visit in Motor Function | Baseline to the completion visit (up to week 25) | The change in motor function was determined at the completion visit compared to baseline using descriptive statistics and nonparametric two-sided 95% confidence intervals based on the Hodges-Lehmann method. For each patient, four specific tasks were defined according to his/her weakened muscle group. The patient had to grade each of the tasks on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (normal function) to 4 (not possible). The overall motor function score was calculated as the sum of the 4 grades, resulting in a score ranging from 0 (optimal) to 16 (worst). The baseline motor function score was calculated as the mean of the patient's assessments at Screening and Week 1. Negative values for change in motor function score indicate improvement, with a more negative value indicating greater improvement compared with the value at baseline. |
| Mean Motor Function Score at Screening and Week 25 | Screening and week 25 | For each patient, four specific tasks were defined according to his/her weakened muscle group. The patient had to grade each of the tasks on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (normal function) to 4 (not possible). The overall motor function score was calculated as the sum of the 4 grades, resulting in a score ranging from 0 (optimal) to 16 (worst). |
| Health-Related Quality of Life at Baseline and Week 25 | At baseline and week 25 | Assessed using a questionnaire on patients' satisfaction with current immunoglobulin G (IgG) treatment, treatment at home, and treatment at the hospital/doctor's office. The questions were answered by choosing a number between 1 (extremely good) and 7 (extremely bad). Note: No patients received IgG treatment at the hospital/doctor's office at Week 25. |
| Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25 | At baseline and week 25 | Treatment satisfaction was assessed using the Life Quality Index, which comprises 15 items rated on a 7-point scale (1 = worst rating, 7 = best rating) with a possible maximum score of 105. The highest score indicates the highest satisfaction with the impact of treatment on social factors. The 15 items were summarized to 4 scales: treatment interference, therapy-related problems, therapy setting, and treatment costs. The raw scores for these scales were transformed to a score ranging from 0 to 100, with 100 being the best score achievable. |
| Overall Health Status at Baseline and Week 25 | Baseline and week 25 | Overall Health Status was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Patients were asked to rate their overall health status by placing a mark on a 100 mm VAS, with 0 being the worst imaginable state and 100 being the best imaginable state. |
| Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Disability | Baseline to week 24 | The change in disability score was determined at week 24 compared to baseline using descriptive statistics and nonparametric two-sided 95% confidence intervals based on the Hodges-Lehmann method. Data for one of the eight subjects was from week 13 as week 24 data were not available. Disability was measured using a modified Guy's Neurological Disability Scale, which comprises subscales for upper and lower limb disability. Both subscales comprise 6 grades, numbered from 0 (no upper limb problem/walking is not affected) to 5 (unable to use either arm for any purposeful movements/usually uses a wheelchair indoors). The disability score is calculated as the sum of both subscales, resulting in a score ranging from 0 to 10. A higher disability score indicates greater disability. Negative values for change in disability score indicate improvement, with a more negative value indicating greater improvement compared with the value at baseline. |
| Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness | For the duration of the study, up to Week 25 | The rate was the number of AEs over the number of infusions administered. Included all AEs that occurred during the entire study period. Mild AE: Did not interfere with routine activities; Moderate AE: Interfered somewhat with routine activities; Severe AE: Impossible to perform routine activities. |
| Number of Patients With Local/Injection Site Reactions | For the duration of the study, up to Week 25 | All AEs arising from local/injection site reactions. |
| Number of Patients With Clinically Relevant Changes in Laboratory Parameters | Baseline to Week 25 | Laboratory parameters included hematology, serum chemistry, and urinalysis parameters. |
| Number of Patients With Clinically Relevant Changes in Vital Signs | Baseline to Week 25 | Vital signs included heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and body temperature. |
| Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness | For the duration of the study, up to Week 25 | Included all AEs that occurred during the entire study period. Mild AE: Did not interfere with routine activities; Moderate AE: Interfered somewhat with routine activities; Severe AE: Impossible to perform routine activities. |
| Mean Disability Score at Baseline and Week 24 | Baseline and Week 24 | Disability was measured using a modified Guy's Neurological Disability Scale, which comprises subscales for upper and lower limb disability. Both subscales comprise 6 grades, numbered from 0 (no upper limb problem/walking is not affected) to 5 (unable to use either arm for any purposeful movements/usually uses a wheelchair indoors). The disability score is calculated as the sum of both subscales, resulting in a score ranging from 0 to 10. A higher disability score indicates greater disability. |
Countries
Italy, Switzerland, United Kingdom
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Vivaglobin Human normal immunoglobulin, 0.1 to 0.5 g/kg body weight per week. | 8 |
| Total | 8 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Lack of Efficacy | 1 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Vivaglobin |
|---|---|
| Age Continuous | 57.3 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.78 |
| Age, Customized > 18 to < 65 years | 5 participants |
| Age, Customized >= 65 years | 3 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 4 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 4 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk |
|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | — / — |
| other Total, other adverse events | 4 / 8 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 8 |
Outcome results
Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Muscle Strength
The change in Medical Research Council (MRC) score was determined at week 24 compared to baseline using descriptive statistics and nonparametric, two-sided 95% confidence intervals based on the Hodges-Lehmann method. Data for one of the eight subjects was from week 13 as week 24 data were not available. The 200-point MRC sum score is the sum of scores for 20 bilateral (left and right side) muscle groups, each rated between 0 (no movement) to 5 (normal movement/power). A higher MRC sum score indicates greater muscle contraction/limb movement. Positive values for change in MRC sum score indicate improvement, with a more positive value indicating greater muscle contraction/ limb movement compared with the value at baseline.
Time frame: Baseline to week 24
Population: The Intention-to-Treat (ITT) data set comprised all patients treated with the study drug who had at least one post-baseline measurement for muscle strength.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Muscle Strength | 0.4 score on a scale | 95% Confidence Interval 5.07 |
Mean Overall MRC Score at Baseline and Week 24
The 200-point MRC sum score is the sum of scores for 20 bilateral (left and right side) muscle groups, each rated between 0 (no movement) to 5 (normal movement/power). A higher MRC sum score indicates greater muscle contraction/limb movement.
Time frame: Baseline and week 24
Population: The ITT data set comprised all patients treated with the study drug who had at least one post-baseline measurement for muscle strength.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Mean Overall MRC Score at Baseline and Week 24 | MRC score at baseline (n = 8) | 178.3 score on a scale |
| Vivaglobin | Mean Overall MRC Score at Baseline and Week 24 | MRC score at week 24 (n = 7) | 184.3 score on a scale |
Change From Baseline to the Completion Visit in Motor Function
The change in motor function was determined at the completion visit compared to baseline using descriptive statistics and nonparametric two-sided 95% confidence intervals based on the Hodges-Lehmann method. For each patient, four specific tasks were defined according to his/her weakened muscle group. The patient had to grade each of the tasks on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (normal function) to 4 (not possible). The overall motor function score was calculated as the sum of the 4 grades, resulting in a score ranging from 0 (optimal) to 16 (worst). The baseline motor function score was calculated as the mean of the patient's assessments at Screening and Week 1. Negative values for change in motor function score indicate improvement, with a more negative value indicating greater improvement compared with the value at baseline.
Time frame: Baseline to the completion visit (up to week 25)
Population: The analysis population comprised the subjects in the ITT data set (ie, all patients treated with the study drug) who had at least one post-baseline value (and if necessary a baseline value).
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Change From Baseline to the Completion Visit in Motor Function | 0.4 score on a scale | 95% Confidence Interval 1.94 |
Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Disability
The change in disability score was determined at week 24 compared to baseline using descriptive statistics and nonparametric two-sided 95% confidence intervals based on the Hodges-Lehmann method. Data for one of the eight subjects was from week 13 as week 24 data were not available. Disability was measured using a modified Guy's Neurological Disability Scale, which comprises subscales for upper and lower limb disability. Both subscales comprise 6 grades, numbered from 0 (no upper limb problem/walking is not affected) to 5 (unable to use either arm for any purposeful movements/usually uses a wheelchair indoors). The disability score is calculated as the sum of both subscales, resulting in a score ranging from 0 to 10. A higher disability score indicates greater disability. Negative values for change in disability score indicate improvement, with a more negative value indicating greater improvement compared with the value at baseline.
Time frame: Baseline to week 24
Population: The analysis population comprised the subjects in the ITT data set (ie, all patients treated with the study drug) who had at least one post-baseline value (and if necessary a baseline value).
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Change From Baseline to Week 24 in Disability | 0.1 score on a scale | 95% Confidence Interval 1.13 |
Health-Related Quality of Life at Baseline and Week 25
Assessed using a questionnaire on patients' satisfaction with current immunoglobulin G (IgG) treatment, treatment at home, and treatment at the hospital/doctor's office. The questions were answered by choosing a number between 1 (extremely good) and 7 (extremely bad). Note: No patients received IgG treatment at the hospital/doctor's office at Week 25.
Time frame: At baseline and week 25
Population: The analysis population comprised the subjects in the ITT data set (ie, all patients treated with the study drug) who had at least one post-baseline value (and if necessary a baseline value).
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Health-Related Quality of Life at Baseline and Week 25 | Current treatment, baseline (n = 8) | 2.6 units on a scale | Full Range 1.06 |
| Vivaglobin | Health-Related Quality of Life at Baseline and Week 25 | Current treatment, week 25 (n = 7) | 1.3 units on a scale | Full Range 0.49 |
| Vivaglobin | Health-Related Quality of Life at Baseline and Week 25 | At home, baseline (n = 3) | 1.0 units on a scale | Full Range 0 |
| Vivaglobin | Health-Related Quality of Life at Baseline and Week 25 | At home, week 25 (n = 7) | 1.1 units on a scale | Full Range 0.38 |
| Vivaglobin | Health-Related Quality of Life at Baseline and Week 25 | In the hospital/doctor's office, baseline (n = 7) | 2.9 units on a scale | Full Range 1.57 |
Mean Disability Score at Baseline and Week 24
Disability was measured using a modified Guy's Neurological Disability Scale, which comprises subscales for upper and lower limb disability. Both subscales comprise 6 grades, numbered from 0 (no upper limb problem/walking is not affected) to 5 (unable to use either arm for any purposeful movements/usually uses a wheelchair indoors). The disability score is calculated as the sum of both subscales, resulting in a score ranging from 0 to 10. A higher disability score indicates greater disability.
Time frame: Baseline and Week 24
Population: The analysis population comprised the subjects in the ITT data set (ie, all patients treated with the study drug) who had at least one post-baseline value (and if necessary a baseline value).
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Mean Disability Score at Baseline and Week 24 | Disability score at baseline (n = 8) | 2.0 score on a scale |
| Vivaglobin | Mean Disability Score at Baseline and Week 24 | Disability score at week 24 (n = 7) | 1.9 score on a scale |
Mean Motor Function Score at Screening and Week 25
For each patient, four specific tasks were defined according to his/her weakened muscle group. The patient had to grade each of the tasks on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (normal function) to 4 (not possible). The overall motor function score was calculated as the sum of the 4 grades, resulting in a score ranging from 0 (optimal) to 16 (worst).
Time frame: Screening and week 25
Population: The analysis population comprised the subjects in the ITT data set (ie, all patients treated with the study drug) who had at least one post-baseline value (and if necessary a baseline value).
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Mean Motor Function Score at Screening and Week 25 | Motor function score at screening (n = 8) | 5.5 score on a scale |
| Vivaglobin | Mean Motor Function Score at Screening and Week 25 | Motor function score at week 25 (n = 7) | 4.6 score on a scale |
Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness
Included all AEs that occurred during the entire study period. Mild AE: Did not interfere with routine activities; Moderate AE: Interfered somewhat with routine activities; Severe AE: Impossible to perform routine activities.
Time frame: For the duration of the study, up to Week 25
Population: The safety data set (SDS) comprised all treated patients.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness | All AEs | 4 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness | Mild AEs | 3 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness | Moderate AEs | 2 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness | Severe AEs | 0 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness | Not related AEs | 4 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness | Possibly related AEs | 0 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness | Probably related AEs | 0 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Adverse Events (AEs) by Severity and Relatedness | Related AEs | 1 participants |
Number of Patients With Clinically Relevant Changes in Laboratory Parameters
Laboratory parameters included hematology, serum chemistry, and urinalysis parameters.
Time frame: Baseline to Week 25
Population: The SDS comprised all treated patients.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Clinically Relevant Changes in Laboratory Parameters | 0 participants |
Number of Patients With Clinically Relevant Changes in Vital Signs
Vital signs included heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and body temperature.
Time frame: Baseline to Week 25
Population: The SDS comprised all treated patients.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Clinically Relevant Changes in Vital Signs | 0 participants |
Number of Patients With Local/Injection Site Reactions
All AEs arising from local/injection site reactions.
Time frame: For the duration of the study, up to Week 25
Population: The SDS comprised all treated patients.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Local/Injection Site Reactions | Total | 1 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Local/Injection Site Reactions | Skin reaction | 1 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Local/Injection Site Reactions | Injection site oedema | 1 participants |
| Vivaglobin | Number of Patients With Local/Injection Site Reactions | Injection site pruritis | 1 participants |
Overall Health Status at Baseline and Week 25
Overall Health Status was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Patients were asked to rate their overall health status by placing a mark on a 100 mm VAS, with 0 being the worst imaginable state and 100 being the best imaginable state.
Time frame: Baseline and week 25
Population: The analysis population comprised the subjects in the ITT data set (ie, all patients treated with the study drug) who had at least one post-baseline value (and if necessary a baseline value).
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Overall Health Status at Baseline and Week 25 | Baseline (n = 8) | 72.1 units on a scale | Full Range 15.38 |
| Vivaglobin | Overall Health Status at Baseline and Week 25 | Week 25 (n = 7) | 73.9 units on a scale | Full Range 14.67 |
Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness
The rate was the number of AEs over the number of infusions administered. Included all AEs that occurred during the entire study period. Mild AE: Did not interfere with routine activities; Moderate AE: Interfered somewhat with routine activities; Severe AE: Impossible to perform routine activities.
Time frame: For the duration of the study, up to Week 25
Population: The SDS comprised all treated patients.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness | All AEs | 0.104 AEs per infusion |
| Vivaglobin | Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness | Mild AEs | 0.093 AEs per infusion |
| Vivaglobin | Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness | Moderate AEs | 0.011 AEs per infusion |
| Vivaglobin | Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness | Severe AEs | 0.000 AEs per infusion |
| Vivaglobin | Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness | Not related AEs | 0.038 AEs per infusion |
| Vivaglobin | Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness | Possibly related AEs | 0.000 AEs per infusion |
| Vivaglobin | Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness | Probably related AEs | 0.000 AEs per infusion |
| Vivaglobin | Rate of AEs by Severity and Relatedness | Related AEs | 0.066 AEs per infusion |
Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25
Treatment satisfaction was assessed using the Life Quality Index, which comprises 15 items rated on a 7-point scale (1 = worst rating, 7 = best rating) with a possible maximum score of 105. The highest score indicates the highest satisfaction with the impact of treatment on social factors. The 15 items were summarized to 4 scales: treatment interference, therapy-related problems, therapy setting, and treatment costs. The raw scores for these scales were transformed to a score ranging from 0 to 100, with 100 being the best score achievable.
Time frame: At baseline and week 25
Population: The analysis population comprised the subjects in the ITT data set (ie, all patients treated with the study drug) who had at least one post-baseline value (and if necessary a baseline value).
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vivaglobin | Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25 | Treatment interference, baseline (n = 8) | 60.76 units on a scale | Full Range 25.827 |
| Vivaglobin | Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25 | Treatment interference, week 25 (n = 6) | 91.67 units on a scale | Full Range 9.78 |
| Vivaglobin | Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25 | Therapy-related problems, baseline (n = 8) | 70.30 units on a scale | Full Range 27.055 |
| Vivaglobin | Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25 | Therapy-related problems, week 25 (n = 7) | 89.29 units on a scale | Full Range 14.402 |
| Vivaglobin | Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25 | Therapy setting, baseline (n = 8) | 75.01 units on a scale | Full Range 33.844 |
| Vivaglobin | Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25 | Therapy setting, week 25 (n = 6) | 96.28 units on a scale | Full Range 6.743 |
| Vivaglobin | Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25 | Treatment costs, baseline (n = 8) | 70.84 units on a scale | Full Range 34.498 |
| Vivaglobin | Treatment Satisfaction at Baseline and Week 25 | Treatment costs, week 25 (n = 6) | 86.10 units on a scale | Full Range 19.486 |