Skip to content

Aim to Reduce Movements in Tardive Dyskinesia

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of SD-809 (Deutetrabenazine) for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Tardive Dyskinesia

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02195700
Acronym
ARM-TD
Enrollment
117
Registered
2014-07-21
Start date
2014-06-30
Completion date
2015-05-31
Last updated
2021-11-09

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

Conditions

Tardive Dyskinesia

Keywords

Dyskinesias, Movement Disorders, Central Nervous System Diseases, Nervous System Diseases, Neurologic Manifestations, Signs and Symptoms

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to determine whether an investigational drug, SD-809 (deutetrabenazine), will reduce the severity of abnormal involuntary movements of tardive dyskinesia.

Interventions

DRUGSD-809

SD-809 tablets taken twice daily for 12 weeks, includes a dose titration period and maintenance period.

DRUGPlacebo

Placebo tablets taken twice daily for 12 weeks.

Sponsors

Auspex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

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

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* History of using a dopamine receptor antagonist for at least 3 months * Clinical diagnosis of tardive dyskinesia and has had symptoms for at least 3 months prior to screening * Subjects with underlying psychiatric diagnosis are stable and have no change in psychoactive medications * Have a mental health provider and does not anticipate any changes to treatment regimen in the next 3 months * History of being compliant with prescribed medications * Able to swallow study drug whole * Be in good general health and is expected to attend all study visits and complete study assessments * Female subjects must not be pregnant and agree to an acceptable method of contraception

Exclusion criteria

* Currently receiving medication for the treatment of tardive dyskinesia * Have a neurological condition other than tardive dyskinesia that may interfere with assessing the severity of dyskinesias * Have a serious untreated or undertreated psychiatric illness * Have recent history or presence of violent behavior * Have unstable or serious medical illness * Have evidence of hepatic impairment * Have evidence of renal impairment * Have known allergy to any component of SD-809 or tetrabenazine * Has participated in an investigational drug or device trial and received study drug within 30 days * Have acknowledged use of illicit drugs * Have a history of alcohol or substance abuse in the previous 12 months

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Centrally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using Mixed Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) AnalysisDay 0 (Baseline), Weeks 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12AIMS is an assessment tool used to detect and follow the severity of TD over time. The AIMS is composed of 12 clinician-administered and scored items. AIMS was digitally video recorded using a standard protocol and independently reviewed by blinded central raters who were experts in movement disorders. This outcome sums items 1 through 7 which cover orofacial movements, and extremity and truncal dyskinesia. Severity ratings were from 0 (none) to 4 (severe) for a total scale of 0 (no orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia) to 28 (severe orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia). A negative change from baseline score indicates improvement. A MMRM analysis with change from baseline in AIMS score as dependent variable was used. The model included fixed effects for treatment, time point, treatment-by-time point interaction, DRA status, and baseline AIMS as a covariate. An unstructured covariance model was used.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of Patients Who Are a Treatment Success at Week 12 as Assessed by the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)Week 12The PGIC is a single-item questionnaire that asks the patient to assess their TD symptoms at specific visits after initiating therapy. The PGIC uses a 7 point Likert Scale, ranging from very much worse (-3) to very much improved (+3), to assess overall response to therapy. A treatment success was defined as much improved or very much improved at the week 12 visit. Patients whose status at week 12 was not known, as well as patients who were not much improved or very much improved at the week 12 visit, were considered treatment failures.
Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Modified Craniocervical Dystonia Questionnaire (CDQ-24)Day 0 (Baseline), Week 12 with last observation carried forwardThe CDQ-24 is a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire developed for use in patients with craniocervical dystonia, including both cervical dystonia (CD) and blepharospasm (BPS). The CDQ 24 was modified such that the questions focus more directly on the impact of TD (as opposed to CD/BPS) on quality of life. The following domains are evaluated in the CDQ-24: stigma, emotional well-being, pain, activities of daily living, and social/family life. Each of the 24 questions were rated by patients on a scale of 0=no impairment to 4=severest impairment for a total scale of 0 (no impairment) to 96 (severe impairment). Negative change from baseline scores indicate improvement.
Participants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodDay 1 to Week 12An adverse event was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Severity was rated by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate and severe, with severe= an AE which prevents normal daily activities. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator and includes possibly, probably and definitely related categories. Serious AEs (SAE) include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes.
Percentage of Patients Who Are a Treatment Success at Week 12 as Assessed by the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC)Week 12The CGIC is a single-item questionnaire that asks the investigator to assess a patient's TD symptoms at specific visits after initiating therapy. The CGIC uses a 7 point Likert Scale, ranging from very much worse (-3) to very much improved (+3), to assess overall response to therapy. A treatment success was defined as much improved or very much improved at the week 12 visit. Patients whose status at week 12 was not known, as well as patients who were not much improved or very much improved at the week 12 visit, were considered treatment failures.
Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12Day 0 (Baseline), Week 12Response level represents the % improvement in AIMS from baseline. AIMS is an assessment tool used to detect and follow the severity of TD over time. The AIMS is composed of 12 clinician-administered and scored items. AIMS was digitally video recorded using a standard protocol and independently reviewed by blinded central raters who were experts in movement disorders. This outcome sums items 1 through 7 which cover orofacial movements, and extremity and truncal dyskinesia. Severity ratings were from 0 (none) to 4 (severe) for a total scale of 0 (no orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia) to 28 (severe orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia). Patients with a missing AIMS score were considered to be AIMS nonresponders.
Change in Locally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using MMRM AnalysisDay 0 (Baseline), Weeks 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12This outcome is similar to the primary outcome except that AIMS was read locally. AIMS is an assessment tool used to detect and follow the severity of TD over time. The AIMS is composed of 12 clinician-administered and scored items. This outcome reports the local reading of AIMS data. This outcome sums items 1 through 7 which cover orofacial movements, and extremity and truncal dyskinesia. Severity ratings were from 0 (none) to 4 (severe) for a total scale of 0 (no orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia) to 28 (severe orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia). A negative change from baseline score indicates improvement. A MMRM analysis with change from baseline in AIMS score as dependent variable was used. The model included fixed effects for treatment, time point (weeks 2, 4, 6, 9, and 12), treatment-by-time point interaction, DRA status, and baseline AIMS as a covariate.
Percentage Change in Centrally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using MMRM AnalysisDay 0 (Baseline), Weeks 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12AIMS is an assessment tool used to detect and follow the severity of TD over time. The AIMS is composed of 12 clinician-administered and scored items. AIMS was digitally video recorded using a standard protocol and independently reviewed by blinded central raters who were experts in movement disorders. This outcome sums items 1 through 7 which cover orofacial movements, and extremity and truncal dyskinesia. Severity ratings were from 0 (none) to 4 (severe) for a total scale of 0 (no orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia) to 28 (severe orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia). A negative percent change from baseline score indicates improvement. The MMRM model includes fixed effects for treatment, time point (weeks 2, 4, 6, 9, 12), treatment-by-time point interaction, DRA status, and baseline AIMS as a covariate. Patient is a random effect.

Countries

Czechia, Poland, Slovakia, United States

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

202 patients were screened and gave informed consent to enter the study. 85 were either ineligible for entry into the study or declined study participation. The most common reason for ineligibility (49 patients) was insufficient TD severity as assessed with Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS). 117 patients were randomized.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
SD-809
Patients underwent dose adjustment of SD-809 over the initial 6 weeks of treatment, starting treatment with SD-809 at 6 mg twice daily and titrating to a maximum total daily dose of 48 mg per day. The optimal dose was continued by a 6-week maintenance period, which was followed by a 1-week washout. Patients who completed the study had the option to rollover into a long-term safety study (Study SD-809-C-20, NCT02198794). For patients who did not enter the long-term safety study, there was an additional 3-week safety follow-up period after treatment.
58
Placebo
Patients underwent 'dose adjustment' of placebo over the initial 6 weeks of treatment. The optimal dose was continued by a 6-week maintenance period, which was followed by a 1-week washout. Patients who completed the study had the option to rollover into a long-term safety study (Study SD-809-C-20, NCT02198794). For patients who did not enter the long-term safety study, there was an additional 3-week safety follow-up period after treatment.
59
Total117

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdverse Event12
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up11
Overall StudyNoncompliance10
Overall StudyProtocol Violation02
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject32

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPlaceboSD-809Total
Age, Continuous53.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.64
55.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.82
54.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.28
Body Mass Index29.45 kg/m^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.958
30.35 kg/m^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.926
29.89 kg/m^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.435
Centrally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score9.6 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.77
9.6 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.07
9.6 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.9
Duration of tardive dyskinesia76.8 months
STANDARD_DEVIATION 82.05
72.6 months
STANDARD_DEVIATION 81.65
74.7 months
STANDARD_DEVIATION 81.53
Education Level
>12 years of formal education
29 Participants28 Participants57 Participants
Education Level
=12 years or fewer of formal education
30 Participants30 Participants60 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
11 Participants4 Participants15 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
47 Participants53 Participants100 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
1 Participants1 Participants2 Participants
Height169.72 cm
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.098
169.23 cm
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.462
169.48 cm
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.752
Modified Craniocervical Dystonia Questionnaire (CDQ-24)39.7 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 18.17
38.4 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 20.41
39.1 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 19.26
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
1 Participants2 Participants3 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
14 Participants19 Participants33 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
44 Participants37 Participants81 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
32 Participants29 Participants61 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
27 Participants29 Participants56 Participants
Using a Dopamine Receptor Antagonist (DRA)
No
10 Participants13 Participants23 Participants
Using a Dopamine Receptor Antagonist (DRA)
Yes
49 Participants45 Participants94 Participants
Weight84.95 kg
STANDARD_DEVIATION 20.975
86.94 kg
STANDARD_DEVIATION 24.081
85.94 kg
STANDARD_DEVIATION 22.493

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 580 / 59
other
Total, other adverse events
24 / 5826 / 59
serious
Total, serious adverse events
3 / 585 / 59

Outcome results

Primary

Change in Centrally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using Mixed Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) Analysis

AIMS is an assessment tool used to detect and follow the severity of TD over time. The AIMS is composed of 12 clinician-administered and scored items. AIMS was digitally video recorded using a standard protocol and independently reviewed by blinded central raters who were experts in movement disorders. This outcome sums items 1 through 7 which cover orofacial movements, and extremity and truncal dyskinesia. Severity ratings were from 0 (none) to 4 (severe) for a total scale of 0 (no orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia) to 28 (severe orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia). A negative change from baseline score indicates improvement. A MMRM analysis with change from baseline in AIMS score as dependent variable was used. The model included fixed effects for treatment, time point, treatment-by-time point interaction, DRA status, and baseline AIMS as a covariate. An unstructured covariance model was used.

Time frame: Day 0 (Baseline), Weeks 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12

Population: The Modified ITT (mITT) Population was defined as all patients in the ITT Population who received study drug and had at least 1 centrally read post-baseline assessment of the AIMS from at least 1 scheduled post-baseline time point. Number analyzed includes participants who had week 12 readings minus one placebo patient missing a baseline reading.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
SD-809Change in Centrally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using Mixed Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) Analysis-3.0 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.45
PlaceboChange in Centrally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using Mixed Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) Analysis-1.6 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.46
Comparison: The linear mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) included fixed effects for treatment, each scheduled time point (5 levels: weeks 2, 4, 6, 9, and 12), the treatment-by-time point interaction, and the DRA status. Baseline AIMS score was a covariate. The unstructured covariance model was used, and the primary analysis compared the SD-809 and placebo groups at week 12. This was based on the F-test using the Satterhwaite method to compute the denominator degrees of freedom.p-value: 0.018895% CI: [-2.6, -0.2]unstructured covariance
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Modified Craniocervical Dystonia Questionnaire (CDQ-24)

The CDQ-24 is a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire developed for use in patients with craniocervical dystonia, including both cervical dystonia (CD) and blepharospasm (BPS). The CDQ 24 was modified such that the questions focus more directly on the impact of TD (as opposed to CD/BPS) on quality of life. The following domains are evaluated in the CDQ-24: stigma, emotional well-being, pain, activities of daily living, and social/family life. Each of the 24 questions were rated by patients on a scale of 0=no impairment to 4=severest impairment for a total scale of 0 (no impairment) to 96 (severe impairment). Negative change from baseline scores indicate improvement.

Time frame: Day 0 (Baseline), Week 12 with last observation carried forward

Population: modified intent to treat population

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
SD-809Change From Baseline to Week 12 in the Modified Craniocervical Dystonia Questionnaire (CDQ-24)-11.1 units on a scaleStandard Error 2.14
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Week 12 in the Modified Craniocervical Dystonia Questionnaire (CDQ-24)-8.3 units on a scaleStandard Error 2.31
Secondary

Change in Locally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using MMRM Analysis

This outcome is similar to the primary outcome except that AIMS was read locally. AIMS is an assessment tool used to detect and follow the severity of TD over time. The AIMS is composed of 12 clinician-administered and scored items. This outcome reports the local reading of AIMS data. This outcome sums items 1 through 7 which cover orofacial movements, and extremity and truncal dyskinesia. Severity ratings were from 0 (none) to 4 (severe) for a total scale of 0 (no orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia) to 28 (severe orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia). A negative change from baseline score indicates improvement. A MMRM analysis with change from baseline in AIMS score as dependent variable was used. The model included fixed effects for treatment, time point (weeks 2, 4, 6, 9, and 12), treatment-by-time point interaction, DRA status, and baseline AIMS as a covariate.

Time frame: Day 0 (Baseline), Weeks 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12

Population: modified intent to treat analysis. Number analyzed includes participants who had week 12 readings minus one placebo patient missing a baseline reading.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
SD-809Change in Locally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using MMRM Analysis-4.9 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.64
PlaceboChange in Locally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using MMRM Analysis-3.7 units on a scaleStandard Error 0.65
Secondary

Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12

Response level represents the % improvement in AIMS from baseline. AIMS is an assessment tool used to detect and follow the severity of TD over time. The AIMS is composed of 12 clinician-administered and scored items. AIMS was digitally video recorded using a standard protocol and independently reviewed by blinded central raters who were experts in movement disorders. This outcome sums items 1 through 7 which cover orofacial movements, and extremity and truncal dyskinesia. Severity ratings were from 0 (none) to 4 (severe) for a total scale of 0 (no orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia) to 28 (severe orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia). Patients with a missing AIMS score were considered to be AIMS nonresponders.

Time frame: Day 0 (Baseline), Week 12

Population: modified intent to treat population.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
SD-809Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=90%3.6 percentage of participants
SD-809Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=10%69.6 percentage of participants
SD-809Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=20%50.0 percentage of participants
SD-809Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=30%46.4 percentage of participants
SD-809Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=40%32.1 percentage of participants
SD-809Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=50%23.2 percentage of participants
SD-809Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=60%19.6 percentage of participants
SD-809Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=70%10.7 percentage of participants
SD-809Cumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=80%8.9 percentage of participants
PlaceboCumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=70%1.8 percentage of participants
PlaceboCumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=50%17.5 percentage of participants
PlaceboCumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=10%42.1 percentage of participants
PlaceboCumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=90%1.8 percentage of participants
PlaceboCumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=20%29.8 percentage of participants
PlaceboCumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=60%8.8 percentage of participants
PlaceboCumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=30%24.6 percentage of participants
PlaceboCumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=80%1.8 percentage of participants
PlaceboCumulative Percentage of Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Responders by Response Level (Percentage Improvement From Baseline) at Week 12>=40%22.8 percentage of participants
Secondary

Participants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment Period

An adverse event was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that develops or worsens in severity during the conduct of a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship to the study drug. Severity was rated by the investigator on a scale of mild, moderate and severe, with severe= an AE which prevents normal daily activities. Relation of AE to treatment was determined by the investigator and includes possibly, probably and definitely related categories. Serious AEs (SAE) include death, a life-threatening adverse event, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, OR an important medical event that jeopardized the patient and required medical intervention to prevent the previously listed serious outcomes.

Time frame: Day 1 to Week 12

Population: Safety population

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
SD-809Participants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: SAE3 Participants
SD-809Participants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: treatment-related AE28 Participants
SD-809Participants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: Severe AE3 Participants
SD-809Participants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: Deaths0 Participants
SD-809Participants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: any AE41 Participants
PlaceboParticipants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: Deaths0 Participants
PlaceboParticipants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: any AE36 Participants
PlaceboParticipants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: SAE5 Participants
PlaceboParticipants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: Severe AE3 Participants
PlaceboParticipants With Adverse Events for the Overall Treatment PeriodOverall Treatment Period: treatment-related AE21 Participants
Secondary

Percentage Change in Centrally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using MMRM Analysis

AIMS is an assessment tool used to detect and follow the severity of TD over time. The AIMS is composed of 12 clinician-administered and scored items. AIMS was digitally video recorded using a standard protocol and independently reviewed by blinded central raters who were experts in movement disorders. This outcome sums items 1 through 7 which cover orofacial movements, and extremity and truncal dyskinesia. Severity ratings were from 0 (none) to 4 (severe) for a total scale of 0 (no orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia) to 28 (severe orofacial, truncal, and extremity dyskinesia). A negative percent change from baseline score indicates improvement. The MMRM model includes fixed effects for treatment, time point (weeks 2, 4, 6, 9, 12), treatment-by-time point interaction, DRA status, and baseline AIMS as a covariate. Patient is a random effect.

Time frame: Day 0 (Baseline), Weeks 2, 4, 6, 9 and 12

Population: modified intent to treat population. Number analyzed includes participants who had week 12 readings minus one placebo patient missing a baseline reading.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
SD-809Percentage Change in Centrally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using MMRM Analysis-26.7 percentage changeStandard Error 6.06
PlaceboPercentage Change in Centrally Read Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) Score From Baseline to Week 12 Using MMRM Analysis-15.5 percentage changeStandard Error 6.26
Secondary

Percentage of Patients Who Are a Treatment Success at Week 12 as Assessed by the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC)

The CGIC is a single-item questionnaire that asks the investigator to assess a patient's TD symptoms at specific visits after initiating therapy. The CGIC uses a 7 point Likert Scale, ranging from very much worse (-3) to very much improved (+3), to assess overall response to therapy. A treatment success was defined as much improved or very much improved at the week 12 visit. Patients whose status at week 12 was not known, as well as patients who were not much improved or very much improved at the week 12 visit, were considered treatment failures.

Time frame: Week 12

Population: modified intent to treat population

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
SD-809Percentage of Patients Who Are a Treatment Success at Week 12 as Assessed by the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC)48.2 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Patients Who Are a Treatment Success at Week 12 as Assessed by the Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC)40.4 percentage of participants
Comparison: The secondary efficacy endpoints were analyzed using a hierarchical testing procedure. If the primary analysis was statistically significant (p\<0.05), then the first key secondary endpoint was to be analyzed. If the first key secondary endpoint was statistically significant, then the second key secondary endpoint was to be similarly analyzed. For any analysis that was not statistically significant, all subsequent analyses of key secondary endpoints were exploratory rather than confirmatory.p-value: 0.400195% CI: [-10.2, 25.2]Pearson's chi-square test
Secondary

Percentage of Patients Who Are a Treatment Success at Week 12 as Assessed by the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)

The PGIC is a single-item questionnaire that asks the patient to assess their TD symptoms at specific visits after initiating therapy. The PGIC uses a 7 point Likert Scale, ranging from very much worse (-3) to very much improved (+3), to assess overall response to therapy. A treatment success was defined as much improved or very much improved at the week 12 visit. Patients whose status at week 12 was not known, as well as patients who were not much improved or very much improved at the week 12 visit, were considered treatment failures.

Time frame: Week 12

Population: modified intent to treat population

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
SD-809Percentage of Patients Who Are a Treatment Success at Week 12 as Assessed by the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)42.9 percentage of participants
PlaceboPercentage of Patients Who Are a Treatment Success at Week 12 as Assessed by the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)29.8 percentage of participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 8, 2026