Skip to content

Progression Rate of MSA Under EGCG Supplementation as Anti-Aggregation-Approach

Double-blind, Randomised, Placebo-controlled Parallel Group Study to Investigate the Effect of EGCG Supplementation on Disease Progression of Patients With Multiple System Atrophy (MSA)

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02008721
Acronym
PROMESA
Enrollment
92
Registered
2013-12-11
Start date
2014-01-31
Completion date
2016-12-31
Last updated
2024-03-12

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

Conditions

Multiple System Atrophy

Keywords

Multiple System Atrophy, epigallocatechin gallate

Brief summary

MSA is a rapidly progressive disorder with an average survival time of about 7 years after the first clinical manifestation. No potent symptomatic treatment is currently available. A disease-modifying therapy does not exist either. The growing understanding in recent years of the underlying pathological mechanisms of the disease allows the development of new treatment options that have a modifying effect on the disease progression. Therefore, treatments are urgently required that effect the central underlying pathological mechanism, which appears to be the intracellular aggregation of toxic oligomers of α-synuclein. EGCG, a polyphenol found in green tea, has shown to inhibit the formation of toxic α-synuclein oligomers in vitro and has shown to transform α-synuclein-oligomers in non-toxic oligomer species. There is also evidence for a neuroprotective effect in MPTP-mouse models of PD and is an antioxidant and iron chelator. There are currently 63 clinical studies (http://clinicaltrial.gov) in which EGCG was applied for various indications, such as Multiple Sclerosis, various forms of cancer and Huntington's disease. All of which have shown good tolerability and safety with the applied doses of EGCG of up to 1200 mg per day, demonstrating the safety of the drug under controlled clinical conditions (see 5.3.1 for hepatotoxicity in uncontrolled conditions). These data provide a solid rationale for testing in a clinical trial if supplementation of EGCG can interfere with the core disease mechanism in MSA and consequently retard the clinical progression of the MSA-related disability.

Detailed description

5 Introduction Multiple System Atrophy (MSA) is a slowly progressing neurodegenerative disease that is characterized by i) a hypokinetic movement disorder which defines MSA of the parkinsonian type (MSA-P) or by ii) cerebellar symptoms which define MSA of the cerebellar type (MSA-C). In both types the movement disorder can be accompanied by vegetative symptoms such as orthostatic hypotension. In contrast to Parkinson's disease (PD), the effect of dopaminergic medication on the parkinsonian symptoms is very limited. In spite of several efforts, no disease modifying therapy has been identified so far. Several lines of evidence including epidemiological, in vitro, and in vivo data, suggest that Epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) might be able to delay disease progression of MSA by modifying several aspects in the pathogenesis of MSA such as protein aggregation, oxidative stress and iron accumulation. Therefore, this study is designed to investigate the influence of EGCG on disease progression in patients with MSA. To assess the effect on disease progression, clinical evaluation and MR-imaging will be applied in a bi-center, prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized phase III trial. The primary outcome measure will be the change in motor symptoms from V1 to V7 measured by the UMSARS-ME comparing placebo- vs. verum-treated patients. The secondary efficacy endpoint will be the change from V1 to V7 in the total UMSARS score, in the CGI score and in MRI parameters (global and regional atrophy / iron deposition) comparing placebo- vs. verum-treated patients. 5.1 Background The disease: MSA is a synucleinopathy that is suitable for various reasons as a model disease to investigate disease-modifying effects in α-synuclein (aSyn)-dependent neurodegeneration. The disease progression is more rapid compared to PD and therefore allows the observation of clinically relevant effects in shorter observation periods. As no potent symptomatic treatment of MSA is currently available, the influence of symptomatic active substances on clinical data is limited and placebo can be used as comparator. This solves the potential ethical problem of having to deprive patients of such symptomatic treatment during the study and underlines the high medical need for a symptomatic treatment. Another important argument for neuroprotection studies in MSA is that in three independent studies EMSA, NNIPPS, MEMSA a very similar disease progression was observed over a defined period of time, which enables a precise power analysis with sample sizes and follow-up periods that are suitable for an investigator initiated trial (IIT). The therapeutic target: An increasing amount of data suggests that toxic oligomers from misfolded, disease-specific proteins play a potentially important role in the neuronal cell death in neurodegenerative diseases. Specifically in MSA, oligomeric aSyn aggregate species appear to be crucially involved in the pathogenetic mechanisms. The pharmacological compound: Epidemiological data suggest that ingredients in tea may be neuroprotective for synucleinopathies in man. Regular consumption of tea reduces the risk of contracting PD by about 50%. Also for MSA, a clear trend in the sense of a positive effect of tea consumption on the risk of disease development was observed (OR = 0.5, 95% CI: 0.22-1.5, p = 0.09). EGCG, a polyphenol that is for example found in green tea, inhibits the formation of toxic aSyn oligomers in vitro and transforms aSyn oligomers by direct interaction in alternative, non-toxic oligomer species. Furthermore, EGCG shows a neuroprotective effect in the 1-Methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridin (MPTP) mouse model of PD. In addition, EGCG is an antioxidant and an iron chelator and therefore has more potential beneficial effects on synucleinopathies. The pharmacokinetic properties of EGCG were tested in humans in the serum and in rodents in serum and organs, including the brain in detail. It was found that repeated oral application of doses of EGCG result in a significant increase in serum levels in healthy adults compared to a single dose. The proposed daily dose of 1200 mg of EGCG is comparable to about 15 to 30 cups of green tea (depending on the mode of preparation) (Prof. F. Paul, Berlin, pers. comm.). Animal experiments in rodents have shown that after a single i.v. dose of EGCG, the substance is found in the brain in significant quantities. 5.2 Trial Rationale MSA is a rapidly progressive disorder with an average survival time of about 7 years after the first clinical manifestation. No potent symptomatic treatment is currently available. A disease-modifying therapy does not exist either. The growing understanding in recent years of the underlying pathological mechanisms of the disease allows the development of new treatment options that have a modifying effect on the disease progression. Therefore, treatments are urgently required that effect the central underlying pathological mechanism, which appears to be the intracellular aggregation of toxic oligomers of aSyn. EGCG, a polyphenol found in green tea, has shown to inhibit the formation of toxic aSyn oligomers in vitro and has shown to transform aSyn-oligomers in non-toxic oligomer species. There is also evidence for a neuroprotective effect in MPTP-mouse models of PD and is an antioxidant and iron chelator. There are currently 63 clinical studies in which EGCG was applied for various indications, such as Multiple Sclerosis, various forms of cancer and Huntington's disease. All of which have shown good tolerability and safety with the applied doses of EGCG of up to 1200 mg per day, demonstrating the safety of the drug under controlled clinical conditions. These data provide a solid rationale for testing in a clinical trial if supplementation of EGCG can interfere with the core disease mechanism in MSA and consequently retard the clinical progression of the MSA-related disability. 5.3 Side effects and Risk Benefit Assessment 5.3.1 Side effects In all clinical trials investigating the oral intake of green tea/EGCG in various doses and pharmacological forms, EGCG has shown a good safety and tolerability in daily doses of up to 1200 mg over a period of 6 months. Side effects that have been reported after application of EGCG were usually mild and did not occur more often than under placebo (flatulence, headache, nausea, vertigo, abdominal cramps and muscle pain). Other reported side effects (arterial hypertension, palpitations, headache, polyuria, tremor, sleep disorders, nausea/vomiting) are due to the caffeine part in green tea and are not due to EGCG, as all studies using pure EGCG have not reported such side effects. No relevant or persistent changes in the extensive clinical serum tests have been found so far; also no influence on vital parameters have been reported after using EGCG. Only minimal and transient changes of the blood pressure, echocardiography, liver function tests and serum lipids have been reported. In a study of Chow et al. healthy subjects were given 800 mg EGCG or Polyphenon E (a mixture of several green tea extracts with a 50-75%share of EGCG) once daily or 400 mg twice daily versus placebo over a period of 4 weeks. Only mild side effects occurred in several subjects (flatulence, abdominal pain, nausea, headache, dizziness and muscle pain) that were not occurring more often than under placebo. The SuniMS study, NCT ID: 00525668, recorded no SUSAR in 120 patients with remitting-relapsing MS, who were administered 800 mg Sunphenon/ EGCG per day. They also were able to show an excellent tolerability. Only 15 patients showed mild, clinically insignificant elevations of liver function tests, which are not necessarily caused by the study medication. The ongoing SUPREMES study, NCT ID: 00799, has so far not recorded any SUSAR in 60 patients with progressive MS who have been on up to 1200 mg EGCG/day for up to 48 months. In a study by Chen et al a significant protective effect of orally applied EGCG could be demonstrated in mice with a toxic liver failure caused by tetrachlorohydrocarbons. Otherwise, single cases of hepatotoxicity following application of various forms of green tea polyphenols are known. In the period between 1999 and 2008, 34 such case reports have been published, 29 of which have shown a positive de-challenge and 7 have shown a positive re-challenge. The clinical and pathological symptoms included mild elevations of liver function tests, cholestasis, cholangitis, hepatocellular inflammation and hepatocellular necrosis. The symptoms were usually completely reversible after stopping the medication. One patient died of liver failure. Signs of liver toxicity were recorded between day 9 up to 5 months after beginning a therapy with doses of 187,5 -468,75mg EGCG/day). The withdrawal of a green tea extract in Spain and France (Exolise®) a couple of years ago needs to be mentioned. After application of this medication some cases of severe hepatotoxicity were reported. Symptoms like icterus, massive elevation of transaminases occurred not later than 12 weeks after beginning the treatment with the extract in capsules and were completely reversible few weeks after stopping the medication. The exact underlying mechanisms have not been completely worked out. Possibly these are due to a SAE that is specific for Exolise®, and is connected with the manufacturing process (hydro-alcoholic extraction techniques). For this reason, only the distribution of Exolise® has been stopped by the respective authorities, but not the distribution of other green tea extracts (see also the following publications by the WHO): www.who.int/entity/medicines/publications/restrictedpharm2005.pdf It has not yet been found out which parts of the polyphenols and their metabolites are responsible for the hepatotoxic effects. Even though in most cases mixtures of green tea and polyphenols have been administered it is suspected, that EGCG as a main component of the green tea extracts shows hepatotoxic potential. In favor of this hypothesis is the fact, that there have been reports of elevated transaminases under treatment with EGCG in man and interactions with other substances. EGCG is known to bind to α- and β-estrogene receptors and increases 17 β-estradiol-induced reactions in mice. EGCG is a known inhibitor of the Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) that catalyses the degradation of exogenous and endogenous substances. It is suspected, that for the biotransformation of green tea catechines, COMT plays an important role. COMT polymorphisms with low activity of COMT could result in elevated plasma levels of toxic EGCG metabolites. The cytotoxicity of EGCG in hepatocytes seems to be low in vitro and only doses that are higher by a multiple compared to the doses used in clinical studies lead to liver necrosis in animal models. Also, the extremely low bioavailability in man has to be considered. On the basis of all recent studies using green tea extract and EGCG there are no reports of persistent and severe influence on the physiological systems (blood circulation, respiratory system, central nervous system and urinary tract). Still there are singular case reports of hepatotoxic effects in the context of intake of green tea extracts/ EGCG. As a conclusion, all data are in favor of a good tolerability of the substance. For further details see the investigator's brochure (Polyphenon E). 5.3.2 Risk Benefit Assessment The reported data suggest a safe pharmacological profile apart from individual cases of hepatotoxicity which can be controlled for by routine serum liver parameters. The preclinical data suggest a molecular mode of action for EGCG which appears to target core pathological mechanisms active in MSA. In absence of any effective symptomatic, protective or curative intervention in this devastating disorder, the risk benefit evaluation justifies the conduct of the proposed clinical trial.

Interventions

DRUGEGCG as putative neuroprotective agent

Treatment with 800 mg - 1200 mg EGCG as putative neuroprotective agent

DRUGPlacebo

Placebo

Sponsors

German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)
CollaboratorOTHER
Deutsche Parkinson Vereinigung
CollaboratorOTHER
German Foundation for Neurology
CollaboratorOTHER
ParkinsonFonds Deutschland gGmbH
CollaboratorOTHER
Dr. Johannes Levin
Lead SponsorOTHER

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 No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. clinical possible or clinical probable MSA (Gilman et al., Neurology, 2008 26;71:670-6) 2. Hoehn & Yahr stage I - III 3. A stable regimen for at least 1 month prior to V1 and willingness / no fore-seeable need to change the regimen throughout the 52 week follow-up pe-riod for 1. drugs acting against Parkinsonism (e.g. Levodopa, Dopamine-Agonists, Amantadine and MAO-B-Inhibitors) 2. drugs acting against autonomic dysfunction (e.g. ephedrin, midodrin, fludrucortison, octreotide, desmopresin, oxybutinine) 3. antidepressant and antidementive drugs. 4. No regular consumption of EGCG, green tea, or more than two cups of black tea per day 5. Capability and willingness to give written informed consent indicating that the subject has been informed of and understood all aspects pertinent to the study 6. Capability and willingness to comply with the procedures of the study 7. Contraception by adequate contraceptive methods (oral, injected or im-planted hormonal contraceptive methods, intrauterine pessar, sterilisation or real abstinence) in all female patients with childbearing potential 8. Absence of liver disease documented by transaminases and bilirubin below 2-folds of the upper normal level.

Exclusion criteria

1. Hoehn & Yahr stage \> III (loss of postural reflexes, no independent walking possible, inability to stand unassisted, wheelchair-bound). 2. Neurodegenerative diseases other than MSA 3. Severe liver disease with elevation of transaminases and bilirubin above 2-folds of the upper normal level or regular intake of hepatotoxic drugs 4. Known hypersensitivity to EGCG or to drugs with similar chemical structure 5. Participation in another clinical trial involving administration of an investigational medicinal product within 1 month prior to V1 6. A physical or psychiatric condition, which at the investigator's discretion may put the subject at risk, may confound the trial results, or may interfere with the subject's participation in this clinical trial 7. Persistent abuse of medication, drugs or alcohol 8. Consumption of \> 500 ml grapefruit juice per day (leading to inhibition of cytochrome P-450 isoenzyme 3A4, which may be involved in degradation of EGCG). 9. Current or planned pregnancy or breast feeding in females 10. Females of childbearing potential, who are not using medically reliable methods of contraception for the entire study duration (such as oral, inject-able, or implantable contraceptives, or intrauterine contraceptive devices). 11. Intake of COMT-inhibitors (e.g. Entacapone, Tolcapone) 12. Current or planned therapy with Bortezomib and/ or history of plasmocytoma. 13. Anemia at Screening (Hb \< 10g/dl) 14. Other severe medical conditions upon discretion of the LKP

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change of Score in Motor Examination (ME) of the Unified MSA Rating Scale (UMSARS-ME) From V1 to V7.52 weeksTo assess the efficacy of EGCG vs. Placebo to reduce the progression in the motor examination (ME) of the Unified MSA Rating Scale (UMSARS-ME) from V1 to V7. The UMSARS-ME (Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale, Motor examination) assesses 14 operationalised signs of multiple system atrophy. 25 Scores for all 14 items range from 0 to 4, thus total scores range from 0 to 56. Higher scores mean a worse outcome.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in the UMSARS Total Score From V1 to V752 weeksTo assess the efficacy of EGCG vs. Placebo to reduce the progression from V1 to V7 in UMSARS total score The total score of the UMSARS (Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale) is a disease specific rating scale that comprises the activities of daily living subscale and the motor examination subscale. The activities of daily living subscale assesses motor symptoms and autonomic symptoms (items 1-12 of the UMSARS activities of daily living subscale) with scores from 0-4 for every item, resulting in a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 48. A higher score means a worse outcome. It also includes the 14 items of the UMSARS motor examination subscale with possible scores from 0-4 for every item, resulting in a score range from 0-56. The UMSARS total score hence shows a range from 0 to 104. Higher scores indicate a greater impairment.
Possible Symptomatic Effects of EGCG vs. Placebo Measured by the UMSARS Total Score From V6 to V7 (During the Washout Phase)4 weeksTo assess any effect of EGCG vs. Placebo on the UMSARS total score during the wash-out phase (from V6 to V7) to explore possible symptomatic effects. The total score of the UMSARS (Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale) is a disease specific rating scale that comprises the activities of daily living subscale and the motor examination subscale. The activities of daily living subscale assesses motor symptoms and autonomic symptoms (items 1-12 of the UMSARS activities of daily living subscale) with scores from 0-4 for every item, resulting in a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 48. A higher score means a worse outcome. It also includes the 14 items of the UMSARS motor examination subscale with possible scores from 0-4 for every item, resulting in a score range from 0-56. The UMSARS total score hence shows a range from 0 to 104, a higher score indicates greater impairment.
Percentage of Striatal Volume Loss in MRI (3D MP-RAGE MRI Volumetry, 3D FLAIR) From Baseline to V7 as Effect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo)baseline to 52 weeksTo assess the efficacy of EGCG vs. Placebo to reduce the progression from V1 to V7 (52 weeks) in striatal volume loss measured by MRI (3D MP-RAGE MRI volumetry, 3D FLAIR)
Clinical Safety and Tolerability of EGCG Measured by Death Rates52 weeksClinical safety and tolerability of EGCG measured by number of deaths in EGCG- Group vs Placebo-Group
Effect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo) on Safety and Tolerability: Discontinuation Rates Because of Hepatotoxicity52 weeksEffect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo) on Safety and Tolerability: Measured by Discontinuation rates because of hepatotoxicity (measured by increased aminotransferase concentrations)
Possible Symptomatic Effects of EGCG vs. Placebo Measured by the Change in the UMSARS - ME in the Wash-out Phase (From V6-V7)4 weeksTo assess any effect of EGCG vs. Placebo on the evolution of the above mentioned parameters during the wash-out phase (from V6-V7) measured by the UMSARS - ME. The UMSARS-ME (Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale, Motor examination) assesses 14 operationalised signs of multiple system atrophy. 25 Scores for all 14 items range from 0 to 4, thus total scores range from 0 to 56. Higher scores mean a worse outcome.
Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Visit 5 (30 weeks after Baseline Visit)Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) is a 7 item scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment. Possible ratings are: 1. Normal, not at all ill 2. Borderline mentally ill 3. Mildly ill 4. Moderately ill 5. Markedly ill 6. Severely ill 7. Among the most extremely ill patients
Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 648 weeks after baseline visitClinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) is a 7 item scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment. Possible ratings are: 1. Normal, not at all ill 2. Borderline mentally ill 3. Mildly ill 4. Moderately ill 5. Markedly ill 6. Severely ill 7. Among the most extremely ill patients
Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 752 weeks after baseline visitClinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) is a 7 item scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment.. Possible ratings are: 1. Normal, not at all ill 2. Borderline mentally ill 3. Mildly ill 4. Moderately ill 5. Markedly ill 6. Severely ill 7. Among the most extremely ill patients
Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline VisitVisit 7: 52 weeks after baseline visitThe Clinical Global Impression - Improvement scale (CGI-I) is a 7 point scale that requires the clinician to assess how much the patient's illness has improved or worsened relative to a baseline state at the beginning of the intervention. Compared to the patient's condition at baseline, this patient's condition has either improved or worsened or is unchanged, with a lower score meaning more improvement and a higher score less improvement or worsening respectively. The patient´s state compared to baseline is rated as: 1. Very much improved 2. much improved 3. Minimally improved 4. No change 5. Minimally worse 6. Much worse 7 = Very much worse
Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline VisitVisit 7: 52 weeks after baseline visitThe Clinical Global Impression - Efficacy Index is a 4×4 rating scale that assesses the therapeutic effect of treatment with psychiatric medication and associated side effects. It comprises 4 Items for the therapeutic effect: 1. Marked - Vast improvement. Complete or nearly complete remission of all symptoms 2. Moderate - Decided improvement. Partial remission of symptoms 3. Minimal - Slight improvement which doesn't alter status of care of patient 4. Unchanged or worse combined with 4 items of possible side effects: 1= None - no side effects (S.E.) 2= Side effects (S.E.) do not significantly interfere with patient's functioning 3= S.E. significantly interfere with patient's functioning 4= S. E. outweigh therapeutic effect The lowest total score (score 1) means vast improvement with no side effects; the highest total score (score 16) means unchanged or worse patient´s condition with side effects that outweigh the therapeutic effect.
Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1At baseline visit (max. 4 weeks after the screening visit)Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) is a 7 item scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment. Possible ratings are: 1. Normal, not at all ill 2. Borderline mentally ill 3. Mildly ill 4. Moderately ill 5. Markedly ill 6. Severely ill 7. Among the most extremely ill patients

Countries

Germany

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective Agent
Treatment with 800 mg - 1200 mg EGCG as putative neuroprotective agent EGCG as putative neuroprotective agent: Treatment with 800 mg - 1200 mg EGCG as putative neuroprotective agent
47
Placebo
Placebo Placebo: Placebo
45
Total92

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdverse Event35
Overall StudyDeath42
Overall StudyProtocol Violation32
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject51

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicEGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentPlaceboTotal
Age, Continuous60 years64 years62 years
Region of Enrollment
Germany
47 Participants45 Participants92 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
18 Participants19 Participants37 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
29 Participants26 Participants55 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
4 / 472 / 45
other
Total, other adverse events
25 / 4733 / 45
serious
Total, serious adverse events
18 / 478 / 45

Outcome results

Primary

Change of Score in Motor Examination (ME) of the Unified MSA Rating Scale (UMSARS-ME) From V1 to V7.

To assess the efficacy of EGCG vs. Placebo to reduce the progression in the motor examination (ME) of the Unified MSA Rating Scale (UMSARS-ME) from V1 to V7. The UMSARS-ME (Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale, Motor examination) assesses 14 operationalised signs of multiple system atrophy. 25 Scores for all 14 items range from 0 to 4, thus total scores range from 0 to 56. Higher scores mean a worse outcome.

Time frame: 52 weeks

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentChange of Score in Motor Examination (ME) of the Unified MSA Rating Scale (UMSARS-ME) From V1 to V7.5.66 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.01
PlaceboChange of Score in Motor Examination (ME) of the Unified MSA Rating Scale (UMSARS-ME) From V1 to V7.6.60 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.99
Comparison: Power calculation: 80% power, 5% P-level, 50% effect size, i.e. an expected mean yearly UMSARS-ME increase of 3,9 under verum treatment compared to 7.8 ± 6.8 (mean ± standard deviation) under Placebo treatment.~We used a linear mixed-effects model to test the primary hypothesis-ie, to compare differences in the change in motor examination scores on UMSARS between baseline and week 52 between the study groups.p-value: 0.51Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Change in the UMSARS Total Score From V1 to V7

To assess the efficacy of EGCG vs. Placebo to reduce the progression from V1 to V7 in UMSARS total score The total score of the UMSARS (Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale) is a disease specific rating scale that comprises the activities of daily living subscale and the motor examination subscale. The activities of daily living subscale assesses motor symptoms and autonomic symptoms (items 1-12 of the UMSARS activities of daily living subscale) with scores from 0-4 for every item, resulting in a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 48. A higher score means a worse outcome. It also includes the 14 items of the UMSARS motor examination subscale with possible scores from 0-4 for every item, resulting in a score range from 0-56. The UMSARS total score hence shows a range from 0 to 104. Higher scores indicate a greater impairment.

Time frame: 52 weeks

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentChange in the UMSARS Total Score From V1 to V710.33 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.73
PlaceboChange in the UMSARS Total Score From V1 to V710.35 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.71
Comparison: Power calculation: 80% power, 5% P-level, 50% effect size. We used a linear mixed-effects model to test the primary hypothesis-ie, to compare differences in the change in UMSARS total score between baseline and week 52 between the study groups.~We did a post-hoc power calculation based on the mean change in motor examination scores on UMSARS and SDs in the placebo group of the per-protocol study completer set to test the assumptions of our initial power calculation.p-value: 0.99Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Clinical Safety and Tolerability of EGCG Measured by Death Rates

Clinical safety and tolerability of EGCG measured by number of deaths in EGCG- Group vs Placebo-Group

Time frame: 52 weeks

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentClinical Safety and Tolerability of EGCG Measured by Death Rates4 Participants
PlaceboClinical Safety and Tolerability of EGCG Measured by Death Rates2 Participants
Secondary

Effect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo) on Safety and Tolerability: Discontinuation Rates Because of Hepatotoxicity

Effect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo) on Safety and Tolerability: Measured by Discontinuation rates because of hepatotoxicity (measured by increased aminotransferase concentrations)

Time frame: 52 weeks

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentEffect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo) on Safety and Tolerability: Discontinuation Rates Because of Hepatotoxicity2 Participants
PlaceboEffect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo) on Safety and Tolerability: Discontinuation Rates Because of Hepatotoxicity0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visit

The Clinical Global Impression - Efficacy Index is a 4×4 rating scale that assesses the therapeutic effect of treatment with psychiatric medication and associated side effects. It comprises 4 Items for the therapeutic effect: 1. Marked - Vast improvement. Complete or nearly complete remission of all symptoms 2. Moderate - Decided improvement. Partial remission of symptoms 3. Minimal - Slight improvement which doesn't alter status of care of patient 4. Unchanged or worse combined with 4 items of possible side effects: 1= None - no side effects (S.E.) 2= Side effects (S.E.) do not significantly interfere with patient's functioning 3= S.E. significantly interfere with patient's functioning 4= S. E. outweigh therapeutic effect The lowest total score (score 1) means vast improvement with no side effects; the highest total score (score 16) means unchanged or worse patient´s condition with side effects that outweigh the therapeutic effect.

Time frame: Visit 7: 52 weeks after baseline visit

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.~In the EGCG group only 32 of 47 patients provided data at visit 5 due to SAE/drop out; likewise in the placebo group only 30 of 45 patients.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 9 (minimal therapeutic effect - no side effects1 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 13 (unchanged or worse -no side effects)28 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 7 (moderate therapeutic effect - side effects significantly interfering)1 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 14 (unchanged or worse -side effects not significantly interfering)1 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 11 (minimal therapeutic effect - side effects significantly interfering)0 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 15 (unchanged or worse -side effects significantly interfering)1 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 5 (moderate therapeutic effect - no side effects0 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 15 (unchanged or worse -side effects significantly interfering)1 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 5 (moderate therapeutic effect - no side effects1 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 7 (moderate therapeutic effect - side effects significantly interfering)0 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 9 (minimal therapeutic effect - no side effects1 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 11 (minimal therapeutic effect - side effects significantly interfering)1 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 13 (unchanged or worse -no side effects)26 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Efficacy Index (Therapeutic Effect of Treatment With Medication and Associated Side Effects) at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitefficacy index score 14 (unchanged or worse -side effects not significantly interfering)0 participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visit

The Clinical Global Impression - Improvement scale (CGI-I) is a 7 point scale that requires the clinician to assess how much the patient's illness has improved or worsened relative to a baseline state at the beginning of the intervention. Compared to the patient's condition at baseline, this patient's condition has either improved or worsened or is unchanged, with a lower score meaning more improvement and a higher score less improvement or worsening respectively. The patient´s state compared to baseline is rated as: 1. Very much improved 2. much improved 3. Minimally improved 4. No change 5. Minimally worse 6. Much worse 7 = Very much worse

Time frame: Visit 7: 52 weeks after baseline visit

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.~In the EGCG group only 32 of 47 patients provided data at visit 5 due to SAE/drop out; likewise in the placebo group only 35 of 45 patients.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =34 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =57 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =20 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =68 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =410 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =73 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =10 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =71 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =10 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =20 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =35 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =48 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =512 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I): Improvement Level at Visit 7 Compared to the Baseline Visitglobal improvement =69 participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1

Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) is a 7 item scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment. Possible ratings are: 1. Normal, not at all ill 2. Borderline mentally ill 3. Mildly ill 4. Moderately ill 5. Markedly ill 6. Severely ill 7. Among the most extremely ill patients

Time frame: At baseline visit (max. 4 weeks after the screening visit)

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=38 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=513 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness =21 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=60 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=423 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=70 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1Severity of illness=12 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=70 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1Severity of illness=11 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness =20 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=36 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=417 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=520 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 1severity of illness=61 participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5

Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) is a 7 item scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment. Possible ratings are: 1. Normal, not at all ill 2. Borderline mentally ill 3. Mildly ill 4. Moderately ill 5. Markedly ill 6. Severely ill 7. Among the most extremely ill patients

Time frame: Visit 5 (30 weeks after Baseline Visit)

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.~In the EGCG group only 36 of 47 patients provided data at visit 5 due to SAE/drop out; likewise in the placebo group only 37 of 45 patients.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =36 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =515 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level=21 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =66 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =47 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level=70 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =11 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level=70 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =10 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level=20 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =35 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =49 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =517 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 5Illness Level =66 participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6

Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) is a 7 item scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment. Possible ratings are: 1. Normal, not at all ill 2. Borderline mentally ill 3. Mildly ill 4. Moderately ill 5. Markedly ill 6. Severely ill 7. Among the most extremely ill patients

Time frame: 48 weeks after baseline visit

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.~In the EGCG group only 32 of 47 patients provided data at visit 6 due to SAE/drop out; likewise in the placebo group only 35 of 45 patients.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=36 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=59 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=21 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=69 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=46 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=70 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=11 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=70 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=10 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=20 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=33 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=412 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=511 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 6severity of illness=69 participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7

Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) is a 7 item scale that requires the clinician to rate the severity of the patient's illness at the time of assessment.. Possible ratings are: 1. Normal, not at all ill 2. Borderline mentally ill 3. Mildly ill 4. Moderately ill 5. Markedly ill 6. Severely ill 7. Among the most extremely ill patients

Time frame: 52 weeks after baseline visit

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.~In the EGCG group only 23 of 47 patients provided data at visit 7 due to SAE/drop out; likewise in the placebo group only 37 of 45 patients.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=32 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=59 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=21 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=64 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=47 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=70 participants
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=10 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=71 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=10 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=20 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=33 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=49 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=516 participants
PlaceboNumber of Participants Achieving Each Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S): Illness Level at Visit 7severity of illness=68 participants
Secondary

Percentage of Striatal Volume Loss in MRI (3D MP-RAGE MRI Volumetry, 3D FLAIR) From Baseline to V7 as Effect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo)

To assess the efficacy of EGCG vs. Placebo to reduce the progression from V1 to V7 (52 weeks) in striatal volume loss measured by MRI (3D MP-RAGE MRI volumetry, 3D FLAIR)

Time frame: baseline to 52 weeks

Population: 17 patients in the EGCG-group and 15 patients in the placebo group took part in the MRI substudy.~A reduced number of 11 patients were analysed in the EGCG group and 8 patients in the Placebo group, as only these patients had taken part in the follow-up MRI assessments.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentPercentage of Striatal Volume Loss in MRI (3D MP-RAGE MRI Volumetry, 3D FLAIR) From Baseline to V7 as Effect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo)-0.029 % of volume lossStandard Deviation 0.027
PlaceboPercentage of Striatal Volume Loss in MRI (3D MP-RAGE MRI Volumetry, 3D FLAIR) From Baseline to V7 as Effect of Treatment (Epigallocatechin Gallate vs Placebo)-0.064 % of volume lossStandard Deviation 0.026
Secondary

Possible Symptomatic Effects of EGCG vs. Placebo Measured by the Change in the UMSARS - ME in the Wash-out Phase (From V6-V7)

To assess any effect of EGCG vs. Placebo on the evolution of the above mentioned parameters during the wash-out phase (from V6-V7) measured by the UMSARS - ME. The UMSARS-ME (Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale, Motor examination) assesses 14 operationalised signs of multiple system atrophy. 25 Scores for all 14 items range from 0 to 4, thus total scores range from 0 to 56. Higher scores mean a worse outcome.

Time frame: 4 weeks

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentPossible Symptomatic Effects of EGCG vs. Placebo Measured by the Change in the UMSARS - ME in the Wash-out Phase (From V6-V7)0.68 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.6
PlaceboPossible Symptomatic Effects of EGCG vs. Placebo Measured by the Change in the UMSARS - ME in the Wash-out Phase (From V6-V7)0.49 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.58
Comparison: Power calculation: 80% power, 5% P-level, 50% effect size, i.e. an expected mean yearly UMSARS-ME increase of 3,9 under verum treatment compared to 7.8 ± 6.8 (mean ± standard deviation) under Placebo treatment.~We used a linear mixed-effects model to test the primary hypothesis-ie, to compare differences in the change in motor examination scores on UMSARS between baseline and week 52 between the study groups.p-value: 0.82Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Possible Symptomatic Effects of EGCG vs. Placebo Measured by the UMSARS Total Score From V6 to V7 (During the Washout Phase)

To assess any effect of EGCG vs. Placebo on the UMSARS total score during the wash-out phase (from V6 to V7) to explore possible symptomatic effects. The total score of the UMSARS (Unified Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale) is a disease specific rating scale that comprises the activities of daily living subscale and the motor examination subscale. The activities of daily living subscale assesses motor symptoms and autonomic symptoms (items 1-12 of the UMSARS activities of daily living subscale) with scores from 0-4 for every item, resulting in a minimum score of 0 and a maximum score of 48. A higher score means a worse outcome. It also includes the 14 items of the UMSARS motor examination subscale with possible scores from 0-4 for every item, resulting in a score range from 0-56. The UMSARS total score hence shows a range from 0 to 104, a higher score indicates greater impairment.

Time frame: 4 weeks

Population: Eligible patients were older than 30 years; met the diagnostic criteria for possible or probable parkinsonism-predominant or cerebellar-ataxia-predominant multiple system atrophy; could ambulate independently (ie, Hoehn and Yahr stages 1-3); and had to be on stable anti-Parkinson's, anti-dysautonomia, anti-dementia, and anti-depressant regimens.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
EGCG as Putative Neuroprotective AgentPossible Symptomatic Effects of EGCG vs. Placebo Measured by the UMSARS Total Score From V6 to V7 (During the Washout Phase)0.70 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.91
PlaceboPossible Symptomatic Effects of EGCG vs. Placebo Measured by the UMSARS Total Score From V6 to V7 (During the Washout Phase)-0.29 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.88
Comparison: Power calculation: 80% power, 5% P-level, 50% effect size. We used a linear mixed-effects model to test the primary hypothesis-ie, to compare differences in the change in UMSARS total score between baseline and week 52 between the study groups.~We did a post-hoc power calculation based on the mean change in motor examination scores on UMSARS and SDs in the placebo group of the per-protocol study completer set to test the assumptions of our initial power calculation.p-value: 0.43Mixed Models Analysis

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 2, 2026