Skip to content

Safety and Efficacy of AVP-923 in the Treatment of Central Neuropathic Pain in Multiple Sclerosis

A Phase 2, Double-blind, Randomized, Placebo-controlled, Four-arm, Multicenter, Dose-finding Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Three Dose Levels of AVP-923 (Dextromethorphan/Quinidine) in the Treatment of Central Neuropathic Pain in Patients With Multiple Sclerosis

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01324232
Acronym
PRIME
Enrollment
209
Registered
2011-03-28
Start date
2011-09-08
Completion date
2013-09-26
Last updated
2021-11-22

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Central Neuropathic Pain, Multiple Sclerosis

Brief summary

The objectives of the study are to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of 3 doses of AVP-923 capsules in the treatment of central neuropathic pain in participants with multiple sclerosis.

Detailed description

The objectives of the study are to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of 3 doses of AVP-923 (dextromethorphan \[DM\]/quinidine \[Q\]) capsules containing either 45 mg DM and 10 mg Q (AVP-923-45) or 30 mg DM and 10 mg Q (AVP-923-30) or 20 mg DM and 10 mg Q (AVP-923-20) compared to placebo, for the treatment of central neuropathic pain in a population of participants with multiple sclerosis (MS) over a 12-week period. The MS participant population enrolled includes participants with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) and participants with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS).

Interventions

AVP-923-45 (dextromethorphan 45 mg/quinidine 10 mg) capsules administered once daily for first 7 days followed by twice daily for 11 weeks of the study to complete 12 weeks of treatment.

AVP-923-30 (dextromethorphan 30 mg/quinidine 10 mg) capsules administered once daily for first 7 days followed by twice daily for 11 weeks of the study to complete 12 weeks of treatment.

AVP-923-20 (dextromethorphan 20 mg/quinidine 10 mg) capsules administered once daily for first 7 days followed by twice daily for 11 weeks of the study to complete 12 weeks of treatment.

DRUGPlacebo

Matching placebo capsules administered once daily for first 7 days followed by twice daily for 11 weeks of the study to complete 12 weeks of treatment.

Sponsors

Avanir Pharmaceuticals
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 85 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Main Inclusion Criteria: Multiple Sclerosis (relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis \[RRMS\] or secondary progressive multiple sclerosis \[SPMS\]), Clinical history and symptoms of central neuropathic pain (dysesthetic pain) for at least 3 months prior to screening, pain rating scale (PRS) baseline score = or \> 4, No MS relapse within previous 30 days. Main

Exclusion criteria

Personal history of complete heart block, QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) prolongation, or torsades de pointes, family history of congenital QT interval prolongation syndrome, Myasthenia Gravis, Beck Depression Inventory Second Edition (BDI-II) score \> 19

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Average Logarithms of Dextromethorphan (DM) Plasma Concentrations (Cmax) on Days 22 and 500 to 3 hours post-dose on Day 22 and 50The average of the logarithms of the DM plasma concentrations on Days 22 and 50 were presented.
Association Between the Dextromethorphan Plasma Concentration and the Change From Baseline Pain Rating Scale (PRS) Score to the Average Pain Rating Scale Score During Days 57 Through 84Baseline; Days 57 through 84 (PRS score); Days 22 and 50 (dextromethorphan plasma concentrations)PRS required participants to rate their pain over the past 12 hours (hrs) on a scale of 0 to 10 (0=no pain; 10=worst possible pain). Baseline (B) PRS was defined as the average of the PRS scores in the last 7 days collected prior to the B visit. If participants did not have at least 4 PRS scores during the last 7 days prior to the B visit, then the average of up to 7 of the most recent PRS scores available prior to the B visit was used. Post-B PRS was the average of Days 57 through 84 values. For participants who did not have any PRS scores during Days 57 through 84, the average of the last 7 available post-B PRS scores was used. Change from B was calculated as the post-B score minus B score. The average logarithms of dextromethorphan plasma concentrations (Cmax) on Days 22 and 50 are reported in primary outcome measure #2 below. Pearson correlation was calculated between Cmax as one group of data across the reporting groups and Change from Baseline in PRS score.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Mean Change From Baseline in Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) Scores at Days 57 Through 84Baseline; Days 57 through 84The FSS questionnaire consisted of 9 statements that attempted to explore the severity of fatigue symptoms in participants with MS and other conditions, including chronic fatigue immune dysfunction syndrome and systemic lupus erythematosus, and was designed to differentiate fatigue from clinical depression because both share some of the same symptoms. Participants were asked to respond to each statement on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 indicating Strongly Disagree and 7 indicating Strongly Agree. Total score ranging from 9 to 63, was computed as the sum of the sub-scores for all 9 statements; a higher score indicated increasing fatigue. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Post-Baseline FSS score was the average of Day 57 through 84 values. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the FSS change from Baseline to Days 85 as the dependent variable,
Mean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Baseline; Days 22 and 85The EDSS, a method of quantifying disability in participants with MS was based on neurological examination of 8 functional systems (FS) (pyramidal, cerebellar, brainstem, sensory, bowel and bladder, visual, cerebral, and other) that allowed neurologists to assign a FS score to each of these systems. Neurological findings in each FS were scored on a scale of 0 (low level of problems) to 5 (high level of problems). The other category was not rated numerically but measured disability related to a particular issue, like motor loss. A total averaged EDSS score was then calculated on a scale of 0 (normal) to 10 (death from MS). The total EDSS score was determined by 2 factors: gait and FS scores. A higher score indicated greater disability. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.
Mean Change From Baseline in Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) Scores at Day 85Baseline; Day 85MSIS-29, an instrument measuring the physical (20 items) and psychological (9 items) impact of MS from the participants' perspective was used to evaluate therapeutic effectiveness from the participants' perspective. Participants were asked to circle the response that best described the impact of MS on daily life on a scale of 0 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). The total MSIS-29 score ranged from 0 to 145, was calculated as the sum of the sub-scores for all 29 questions, with lower scores indicating better quality of life. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the MSIS-29 score change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline MSIS-29 as a covariate.
Mean Change From Baseline in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Scores at Day 85Baseline; Day 85PSQI, a self-rated questionnaire was used to assess sleep quality and disturbances over a 1-month time interval. A total of 19 individual items generated 7 component scores: subjective sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, habitual sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, use of sleeping medication, and daytime dysfunction. Each component was scored from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (severe difficulty). The sum of the scores for the 7 components yielded 1 global score (ranging from 0 to 21). Higher PSQI score indicated worse quality of sleep. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the PSQI change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline PQIS as a covariate.
Mean Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) Scores at Day 85Baseline; Day 85BDI-II, a 21-item, self-reported instrument was used to assess the existence and severity of symptoms of depression. Each item corresponded to a symptom of depression and as scored on a 4-point scale, ranging from 0 to 3. Participants were asked to consider each statement as it related to the way they have felt for the past 2 weeks. Each of the 21 items were summed to give a single score for the BDI-II (ranging from 0 to 63). A total score of 0 to 13 indicated minimal depression, a score of 14 to 19 indicated mild depression, a score of 20 to 28 indicated moderate depression, and a score of 29 to 63 indicated severe depression. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the BDI-II change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline BDI-II as a covariate.
Mean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85Baseline; Day 85The SDMT assessed organic cerebral dysfunction in both children (8 years and older) and adults. The SDMT involved a simple substitution task that normal participants could easily perform. Using a reference key, the examinee had 90 seconds to pair specific numbers with given geometric figures. The SDMT score was the total correct response (not counting errors) in 90 seconds and ranged from 0 to 110. Lower scores indicated increased dysfunction. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the SDMT change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline SDMT as a covariate.
Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Days 22, 50, and 85The NRS was an 11-point scale for participant self-reporting of pain. The overall scores ranged from 0 (no spasticity) to 10 (worst possible spasticity). Higher scores indicated increased aggression.
Mean Overall Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scores at Day 85Day 85The PGIC was a standard, validated 7-point categorical scale. The participant was asked to assess the overall change in his or her central neuropathic pain symptoms since entry into the study on a scale of 0 to 7 (0=much better; 7=much worse). Higher scores indicated worsening.
Mean Change From Baseline in MS Neuropsychological Screening Questionnaire (MSNQ) Scores at Day 85Baseline; Day 85MSNQ, a self-reporting, 15-item questionnaire was used to screen for cognitive impairment in participants with MS. Participants (or their informants) scored each item on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (often and greatly interferes with life). The total MSNQ score was calculated as the sum of the sub-scores for all 15 questions and thus ranged from 0 to 60. A higher score indicated greater impairment. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the MSNQ score change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline MSNQ as a covariate.
Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline PRS Score to the Average PRS Score During Days 57 Through 84Baseline; Days 57 through 84The PRS required participants to rate their pain over the past 12 hours on a scale of 0 to 10 (0=no pain; 10=worst possible pain) by circling the number that best described their pain on average over the past 12 hours. Baseline PRS was defined as the average of the PRS scores in the last 7 days collected prior to the Baseline visit. If participants did not have at least 4 PRS scores during the last 7 days prior to the Baseline visit, then the average of up to 7 of the most recent PRS scores available prior to the Baseline visit was used. Post-Baseline PRS was the average of the Day 57 through 84 values. For participants who did not have any PRS scores during Days 57 through 84, the average of the last 7 available post-Baseline PRS scores was used. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline score minus the Baseline score.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change From Baseline in Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) ScoresBaseline; Day 85MAS is not considered as a true endpoint. MAS scores were assessed at Baseline only. Change from Baseline could not be calculated because data for the later timepoints was not collected.

Countries

Argentina, Czechia, Poland, Spain, United States

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

After screening procedures, participants underwent a 1-week washout period for all analgesic medications, with the exception of ibuprofen in doses that did not exceed 800 milligrams per day (mg/day).

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Placebo
Participants received one matching placebo capsule in the morning during the first 7 days of the study. Participants then received one matching placebo capsule twice daily (approximately every 12 hours) during the remaining 11 weeks of the study to complete 12 weeks of treatment.
49
AVP-923-20
Participants received one capsule containing 20 milligrams (mg) dextromethorphan (DM) and 10 mg quinidine (Q) (AVP-923-20) in the morning during the first 7 days of the study. Participants then received one capsule of AVP-923-20 twice daily (approximately every 12 hours) during the remaining 11 weeks of the study to complete 12 weeks of treatment.
53
AVP-923-30
Participants received one capsule containing 30 mg DM and 10 mg Q (AVP-923-30) in the morning during the first 7 days of the study. Participants then received one capsule of AVP-923-30 twice daily (approximately every 12 hours) during the remaining 11 weeks of the study to complete 12 weeks of treatment.
54
AVP-923-45
Participants received one capsule containing 45 mg DM and 10 mg Q (AVP-923-45) in the morning during the first 7 days of the study. Participants then received one capsule of AVP-923-45 twice daily (approximately every 12 hours) during the remaining 11 weeks of the study to complete 12 weeks of treatment.
53
Total209

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002FG003
Overall StudyAdverse Event2566
Overall StudyIntercurrent illness0001
Overall StudyLack of Efficacy2122
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up1000
Overall StudyMissing0010
Overall StudyParticipant Refused Medication0100
Overall StudyParticipant's Personal Reason/Decision0100
Overall StudyProtocol Violation0002
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject0340

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicTotalPlaceboAVP-923-20AVP-923-30AVP-923-45
Age, Continuous48.5 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.63
49.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.41
47.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.2
49.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.21
48.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.04
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
16 Participants3 Participants4 Participants5 Participants4 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Caucasian
186 Participants43 Participants46 Participants49 Participants48 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Hispanic or Latino
6 Participants2 Participants3 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
40 Participants9 Participants7 Participants12 Participants12 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
169 Participants40 Participants46 Participants42 Participants41 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
EG003
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 490 / 540 / 530 / 53
other
Total, other adverse events
33 / 4940 / 5443 / 5340 / 53
serious
Total, serious adverse events
1 / 491 / 541 / 532 / 53

Outcome results

Primary

Association Between the Dextromethorphan Plasma Concentration and the Change From Baseline Pain Rating Scale (PRS) Score to the Average Pain Rating Scale Score During Days 57 Through 84

PRS required participants to rate their pain over the past 12 hours (hrs) on a scale of 0 to 10 (0=no pain; 10=worst possible pain). Baseline (B) PRS was defined as the average of the PRS scores in the last 7 days collected prior to the B visit. If participants did not have at least 4 PRS scores during the last 7 days prior to the B visit, then the average of up to 7 of the most recent PRS scores available prior to the B visit was used. Post-B PRS was the average of Days 57 through 84 values. For participants who did not have any PRS scores during Days 57 through 84, the average of the last 7 available post-B PRS scores was used. Change from B was calculated as the post-B score minus B score. The average logarithms of dextromethorphan plasma concentrations (Cmax) on Days 22 and 50 are reported in primary outcome measure #2 below. Pearson correlation was calculated between Cmax as one group of data across the reporting groups and Change from Baseline in PRS score.

Time frame: Baseline; Days 57 through 84 (PRS score); Days 22 and 50 (dextromethorphan plasma concentrations)

Population: Modified Intention-To-Treat (MITT) Population: all participants in the ITT Population (randomized participants) who received at least one dose of study drug, provided a Baseline PRS score, and had at least one post-Baseline PRS assessment. Analysis was based on the randomized treatment assigned (regardless of actual treatment received).

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
PlaceboAssociation Between the Dextromethorphan Plasma Concentration and the Change From Baseline Pain Rating Scale (PRS) Score to the Average Pain Rating Scale Score During Days 57 Through 84-1.821 units on a scale
AVP-923-20Association Between the Dextromethorphan Plasma Concentration and the Change From Baseline Pain Rating Scale (PRS) Score to the Average Pain Rating Scale Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.143 units on a scale
AVP-923-30Association Between the Dextromethorphan Plasma Concentration and the Change From Baseline Pain Rating Scale (PRS) Score to the Average Pain Rating Scale Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.650 units on a scale
AVP-923-45Association Between the Dextromethorphan Plasma Concentration and the Change From Baseline Pain Rating Scale (PRS) Score to the Average Pain Rating Scale Score During Days 57 Through 84-1.679 units on a scale
TotalAssociation Between the Dextromethorphan Plasma Concentration and the Change From Baseline Pain Rating Scale (PRS) Score to the Average Pain Rating Scale Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.000 units on a scale
Comparison: The null hypothesis that the true correlation between the change from Baseline PRS scores and the DM plasma concentration was equal to zero and was tested using a 2-sided test at the 5% level of significance within active treatment groups. The regression line was fitted using change from baseline in average PRS during Day 57-84 as the dependent variable and the average of log-transformed DM Plasma Concentration at Day 22 and Day 50 as the independent variable.p-value: =0.9827t-test, 2 sided
Primary

Average Logarithms of Dextromethorphan (DM) Plasma Concentrations (Cmax) on Days 22 and 50

The average of the logarithms of the DM plasma concentrations on Days 22 and 50 were presented.

Time frame: 0 to 3 hours post-dose on Day 22 and 50

Population: MITT Population. Only participants with available data were analyzed.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
AVP-923-20Average Logarithms of Dextromethorphan (DM) Plasma Concentrations (Cmax) on Days 22 and 504.019 Log Micrograms per Liter
AVP-923-30Average Logarithms of Dextromethorphan (DM) Plasma Concentrations (Cmax) on Days 22 and 504.493 Log Micrograms per Liter
AVP-923-45Average Logarithms of Dextromethorphan (DM) Plasma Concentrations (Cmax) on Days 22 and 504.758 Log Micrograms per Liter
TotalAverage Logarithms of Dextromethorphan (DM) Plasma Concentrations (Cmax) on Days 22 and 504.394 Log Micrograms per Liter
Secondary

Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline PRS Score to the Average PRS Score During Days 57 Through 84

The PRS required participants to rate their pain over the past 12 hours on a scale of 0 to 10 (0=no pain; 10=worst possible pain) by circling the number that best described their pain on average over the past 12 hours. Baseline PRS was defined as the average of the PRS scores in the last 7 days collected prior to the Baseline visit. If participants did not have at least 4 PRS scores during the last 7 days prior to the Baseline visit, then the average of up to 7 of the most recent PRS scores available prior to the Baseline visit was used. Post-Baseline PRS was the average of the Day 57 through 84 values. For participants who did not have any PRS scores during Days 57 through 84, the average of the last 7 available post-Baseline PRS scores was used. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline score minus the Baseline score.

Time frame: Baseline; Days 57 through 84

Population: MITT Population. Analysis was carried out using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model, with the PRS score change from Baseline to Days 57-84 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline PRS score as a covariate.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboComparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline PRS Score to the Average PRS Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.04 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.332
AVP-923-20Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline PRS Score to the Average PRS Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.07 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.319
AVP-923-30Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline PRS Score to the Average PRS Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.41 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.316
AVP-923-45Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline PRS Score to the Average PRS Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.00 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.319
TotalComparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline PRS Score to the Average PRS Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.24 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.224
AVP-923-30 and AVP-923-45Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline PRS Score to the Average PRS Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.21 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.225
All AVP-923Comparison of the Adjusted Mean Change From Baseline PRS Score to the Average PRS Score During Days 57 Through 84-2.16 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.184
Comparison: Test of dose trend (overall P value)p-value: =0.8869ANCOVA
Comparison: Pairwise treatment group vs placebop-value: =0.938195% CI: [-0.94, 0.87]ANCOVA
Comparison: Pairwise treatment group vs placebop-value: =0.412895% CI: [-1.28, 0.53]ANCOVA
Comparison: Pairwise treatment group vs placebop-value: =0.942795% CI: [-0.88, 0.94]ANCOVA
Comparison: Pairwise treatment group vs placebop-value: =0.607595% CI: [-1, 0.58]ANCOVA
Comparison: Pairwise treatment group vs placebop-value: =0.66995% CI: [-0.96, 0.62]ANCOVA
Comparison: Pairwise treatment group vs placebop-value: =0.739495% CI: [-0.88, 0.62]ANCOVA
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) Scores at Day 85

BDI-II, a 21-item, self-reported instrument was used to assess the existence and severity of symptoms of depression. Each item corresponded to a symptom of depression and as scored on a 4-point scale, ranging from 0 to 3. Participants were asked to consider each statement as it related to the way they have felt for the past 2 weeks. Each of the 21 items were summed to give a single score for the BDI-II (ranging from 0 to 63). A total score of 0 to 13 indicated minimal depression, a score of 14 to 19 indicated mild depression, a score of 20 to 28 indicated moderate depression, and a score of 29 to 63 indicated severe depression. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the BDI-II change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline BDI-II as a covariate.

Time frame: Baseline; Day 85

Population: MITT Population. For participants with missing data at Day 85, the last available value has been used.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) Scores at Day 850.83 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.868
AVP-923-20Mean Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) Scores at Day 85-0.26 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.835
AVP-923-30Mean Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) Scores at Day 850.21 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.828
AVP-923-45Mean Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) Scores at Day 851.15 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.837
Comparison: The p-value presented tests the hypothesis for overall treatment effect versus no treatment effect.p-value: =0.8068ANCOVA
95% CI: [-3.47, 1.28]
95% CI: [-2.99, 1.74]
95% CI: [-2.07, 2.69]
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85

The EDSS, a method of quantifying disability in participants with MS was based on neurological examination of 8 functional systems (FS) (pyramidal, cerebellar, brainstem, sensory, bowel and bladder, visual, cerebral, and other) that allowed neurologists to assign a FS score to each of these systems. Neurological findings in each FS were scored on a scale of 0 (low level of problems) to 5 (high level of problems). The other category was not rated numerically but measured disability related to a particular issue, like motor loss. A total averaged EDSS score was then calculated on a scale of 0 (normal) to 10 (death from MS). The total EDSS score was determined by 2 factors: gait and FS scores. A higher score indicated greater disability. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value.

Time frame: Baseline; Days 22 and 85

Population: Safety Population: all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug. Only participants with a value at both the Baseline visit and the specific post-Baseline visit have been included in the analysis. Safety analyses were performed on the safety population based on the treatment participants actually received.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 22-0.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.35
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 85-0.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.75
AVP-923-20Mean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 22-0.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.56
AVP-923-20Mean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 85-0.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.67
AVP-923-30Mean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 22-0.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.67
AVP-923-30Mean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 85-0.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.46
AVP-923-45Mean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 850.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.58
AVP-923-45Mean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 22-0.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.63
TotalMean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 22-0.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.56
TotalMean Change From Baseline in Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) Scores at Days 22 and 85Day 85-0.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.62
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) Scores at Days 57 Through 84

The FSS questionnaire consisted of 9 statements that attempted to explore the severity of fatigue symptoms in participants with MS and other conditions, including chronic fatigue immune dysfunction syndrome and systemic lupus erythematosus, and was designed to differentiate fatigue from clinical depression because both share some of the same symptoms. Participants were asked to respond to each statement on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 indicating Strongly Disagree and 7 indicating Strongly Agree. Total score ranging from 9 to 63, was computed as the sum of the sub-scores for all 9 statements; a higher score indicated increasing fatigue. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Post-Baseline FSS score was the average of Day 57 through 84 values. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the FSS change from Baseline to Days 85 as the dependent variable,

Time frame: Baseline; Days 57 through 84

Population: MITT Population. Only those participants with available data were analyzed.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) Scores at Days 57 Through 84-3.32 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.742
AVP-923-20Mean Change From Baseline in Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) Scores at Days 57 Through 84-2.00 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.68
AVP-923-30Mean Change From Baseline in Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) Scores at Days 57 Through 84-6.32 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.642
AVP-923-45Mean Change From Baseline in Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) Scores at Days 57 Through 84-2.12 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.662
p-value: =0.9731ANCOVA
95% CI: [-3.46, 6.09]
95% CI: [-7.72, 1.72]
95% CI: [-3.54, 5.95]
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in MS Neuropsychological Screening Questionnaire (MSNQ) Scores at Day 85

MSNQ, a self-reporting, 15-item questionnaire was used to screen for cognitive impairment in participants with MS. Participants (or their informants) scored each item on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (often and greatly interferes with life). The total MSNQ score was calculated as the sum of the sub-scores for all 15 questions and thus ranged from 0 to 60. A higher score indicated greater impairment. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the MSNQ score change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline MSNQ as a covariate.

Time frame: Baseline; Day 85

Population: MITT Population. Only those participants with available data were analyzed. For participants with missing data at Day 85, the last available value has been used.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in MS Neuropsychological Screening Questionnaire (MSNQ) Scores at Day 85-0.99 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.058
AVP-923-20Mean Change From Baseline in MS Neuropsychological Screening Questionnaire (MSNQ) Scores at Day 85-1.48 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.02
AVP-923-30Mean Change From Baseline in MS Neuropsychological Screening Questionnaire (MSNQ) Scores at Day 85-1.88 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.998
AVP-923-45Mean Change From Baseline in MS Neuropsychological Screening Questionnaire (MSNQ) Scores at Day 850.47 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.006
p-value: =0.4201ANCOVA
95% CI: [-3.4, 2.41]
95% CI: [-3.76, 1.97]
95% CI: [-1.42, 4.34]
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) Scores at Day 85

MSIS-29, an instrument measuring the physical (20 items) and psychological (9 items) impact of MS from the participants' perspective was used to evaluate therapeutic effectiveness from the participants' perspective. Participants were asked to circle the response that best described the impact of MS on daily life on a scale of 0 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). The total MSIS-29 score ranged from 0 to 145, was calculated as the sum of the sub-scores for all 29 questions, with lower scores indicating better quality of life. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the MSIS-29 score change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline MSIS-29 as a covariate.

Time frame: Baseline; Day 85

Population: MITT Population

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) Scores at Day 85-4.84 units on a scaleStandard Error 2.651
AVP-923-20Mean Change From Baseline in Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) Scores at Day 85-4.34 units on a scaleStandard Error 2.551
AVP-923-30Mean Change From Baseline in Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) Scores at Day 85-6.50 units on a scaleStandard Error 2.526
AVP-923-45Mean Change From Baseline in Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) Scores at Day 85-1.41 units on a scaleStandard Error 2.55
Comparison: The p-value presented tests the hypothesis for overall treatment effect versus no treatment effect.p-value: =0.4778ANCOVA
95% CI: [-6.76, 7.74]
95% CI: [-8.89, 5.56]
95% CI: [-3.83, 10.68]
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Scores at Day 85

PSQI, a self-rated questionnaire was used to assess sleep quality and disturbances over a 1-month time interval. A total of 19 individual items generated 7 component scores: subjective sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, habitual sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, use of sleeping medication, and daytime dysfunction. Each component was scored from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (severe difficulty). The sum of the scores for the 7 components yielded 1 global score (ranging from 0 to 21). Higher PSQI score indicated worse quality of sleep. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the PSQI change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline PQIS as a covariate.

Time frame: Baseline; Day 85

Population: MITT Population. For participants with missing data at Day 85, the last available value has been used.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Scores at Day 85-0.51 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.49
AVP-923-20Mean Change From Baseline in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Scores at Day 85-1.02 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.471
AVP-923-30Mean Change From Baseline in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Scores at Day 85-1.36 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.467
AVP-923-45Mean Change From Baseline in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) Scores at Day 85-1.71 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.472
p-value: =0.0685ANCOVA
95% CI: [-1.85, 0.83]
95% CI: [-2.19, 0.48]
95% CI: [-2.54, 0.15]
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85

The SDMT assessed organic cerebral dysfunction in both children (8 years and older) and adults. The SDMT involved a simple substitution task that normal participants could easily perform. Using a reference key, the examinee had 90 seconds to pair specific numbers with given geometric figures. The SDMT score was the total correct response (not counting errors) in 90 seconds and ranged from 0 to 110. Lower scores indicated increased dysfunction. Baseline was defined as last non-missing measurement prior to dosing. Change from Baseline was calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. The analysis was carried out using an ANCOVA model, with the SDMT change from Baseline to Day 85 as the dependent variable, treatment group as a fixed effect, and the Baseline SDMT as a covariate.

Time frame: Baseline; Day 85

Population: MITT Population. Only those participants with available data were analyzed. For participants with missing data at Day 85, the last available value has been used.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85Total correct responses, Oral0.59 units on a scaleStandard Error 2.045
PlaceboMean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85Total correct responses, Written1.85 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.111
AVP-923-20Mean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85Total correct responses, Written3.62 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.086
AVP-923-20Mean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85Total correct responses, Oral2.96 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.881
AVP-923-30Mean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85Total correct responses, Oral1.91 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.525
AVP-923-30Mean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85Total correct responses, Written0.16 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.158
AVP-923-45Mean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85Total correct responses, Oral2.06 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.809
AVP-923-45Mean Change From Baseline in Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Scores at Day 85Total correct responses, Written0.20 units on a scaleStandard Error 1.083
p-value: =0.6315ANCOVA
95% CI: [-3.19, 7.93]
95% CI: [-3.83, 6.45]
95% CI: [-4.01, 6.94]
p-value: =0.1485ANCOVA
95% CI: [-1.31, 4.85]
95% CI: [-4.86, 1.49]
95% CI: [-4.71, 1.41]
Secondary

Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85

The NRS was an 11-point scale for participant self-reporting of pain. The overall scores ranged from 0 (no spasticity) to 10 (worst possible spasticity). Higher scores indicated increased aggression.

Time frame: Days 22, 50, and 85

Population: MITT Population. Only participants with a value at both the Baseline visit and the specific post-Baseline visit have been included in the analysis. For participants with missing data at Day 85, the last available value has been used.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 223.29 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.717
PlaceboMean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 853.66 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.869
PlaceboMean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 503.24 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.721
AVP-923-20Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 502.89 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.633
AVP-923-20Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 223.56 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.016
AVP-923-20Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 853.13 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.085
AVP-923-30Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 504.06 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.888
AVP-923-30Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 223.41 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.723
AVP-923-30Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 853.87 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.825
AVP-923-45Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 223.90 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.649
AVP-923-45Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 853.36 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.666
AVP-923-45Mean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 503.54 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.364
TotalMean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 503.42 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.666
TotalMean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 223.54 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.762
TotalMean Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Scores at Days 22, 50, and 85Day 853.50 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.857
Comparison: The null hypothesis is that the true correlation between NRS scores and DM plasma concentration is equal to zero. Only 158 of the 209 participants in the mITT Population were analyzed at Day 22.p-value: =0.1404t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: The null hypothesis that the true correlation between NRS scores and DM plasma concentration is equal to zero. Only 152 of the 209 participants in the mITT Population were analyzed at Day 50.p-value: =0.0805t-test, 2 sided
Comparison: The null hypothesis that the true correlation between NRS scores and DM plasma concentration is equal to zero. Only 185 of the 209 participants in the mITT Population were analyzed at Day 85.p-value: =0.0551t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Mean Overall Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scores at Day 85

The PGIC was a standard, validated 7-point categorical scale. The participant was asked to assess the overall change in his or her central neuropathic pain symptoms since entry into the study on a scale of 0 to 7 (0=much better; 7=much worse). Higher scores indicated worsening.

Time frame: Day 85

Population: MITT Population. Only those participants with available data were analyzed. For participants with missing data at Day 85, the last available value has been used.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PlaceboMean Overall Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scores at Day 853.58 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.842
AVP-923-20Mean Overall Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scores at Day 854.42 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.398
AVP-923-30Mean Overall Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scores at Day 853.70 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.346
AVP-923-45Mean Overall Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scores at Day 853.64 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.298
TotalMean Overall Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scores at Day 853.84 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.244
p-value: =0.9207ANCOVA
Other Pre-specified

Change From Baseline in Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) Scores

MAS is not considered as a true endpoint. MAS scores were assessed at Baseline only. Change from Baseline could not be calculated because data for the later timepoints was not collected.

Time frame: Baseline; Day 85

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026