Skip to content

Study Exploring Safety, Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic of BN82451 in Male Huntington's Disease Patients

A Dose Escalation, Proof of Concept, Phase IIa Study to Investigate the Safety and Tolerability, the Pharmacokinetic and the Pharmacodynamic of BN82451B, Administered Twice Daily Over 4 Weeks, in Male Patients With Huntington's Disease

Status
Terminated
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02231580
Enrollment
17
Registered
2014-09-04
Start date
2014-09-01
Completion date
2016-03-31
Last updated
2019-01-15

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

Conditions

Huntington's Disease

Keywords

Neurodegenerative genetic disorder

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of BN82451B versus placebo after oral administration twice daily (bid) for 28 days in patients with Huntington's Disease (HD).

Interventions

DRUGBN82451B

BN82451B capsule

DRUGPlacebo

Placebo capsule

Sponsors

Ipsen
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
MALE
Age
20 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Male subjects 20 to 70 years old (inclusive). * Provision of written informed consent prior to any study related procedures. In this study consent may be provided by the legal guardian or carer. * Confirmed symptomatic Huntington's Disease diagnosed based on clinical features (i.e. Diagnostic Confidence Level equal to 4) and presence of at least 36 cytosine adenine guanine (CAG) repeats in the Huntington gene as documented by a copy of a previous genetic test report. * Unified Huntington's Disease Rated Scale-Total Motor Score (UDHRS-TMS) greater than or equal to 15. * Ambulatory. * UDHRS-Total Functional Capacity (TFC) greater than or equal to 3 (i.e. Shoulson & Fahn Scale stages 1-3 inclusive. * Subjects on antipsychotic, antidepressant, anxiolytic and hypnotic therapy must have been on stable treatment 4 weeks prior to study drug start and during the study period. * Able to swallow study medication. * Able to perform Q-Motor tests. * If his partner is at risk of pregnancy, the subject agrees to use a condom or be abstinent for 14 days after the last intake of study drug.

Exclusion criteria

* Juvenile forms of Huntington's Disease. * Any form of chorea other than Huntington's Disease. * History of seizure, epilepsy or other convulsive disorder, with the exception of febrile seizures in childhood. * History of conditions susceptible to induce seizures such as severe traumatic brain injury, brain tumours, stroke. * History of neurosurgical procedure. * Current evidence or history (within 1 year of Baseline) of psychosis, hallucinations or delusions, including major depression with psychotic features, as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR). Patients currently experiencing mild depression, or moderate depression which is adequately and appropriately treated in the judgement of the investigator, can participate if depression is not expected to interfere with study participation. * History of drug and/or alcohol abuse as per the DSM IV-TR criteria within 12 months prior to Baseline. * At imminent risk of self harm based on investigator's clinical judgment, with a yes answer on item 4 or 5 on the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (CSSRS) questionnaire. * Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) total score less than or equal to 23. * Used any investigational drugs within 30 days prior to Screening or 5 half lives, whichever is the longest. * Known allergy/sensitivity to the study drugs or their excipients. * A severe or ongoing unstable medical condition (e.g. cardiac, hepatic, renal, metabolic or endocrine). * Any clinically significant condition which, in the opinion of the investigator, would interfere with the trial evaluations or optimal participation in the trial. * Any significant laboratory results which, in the investigator's opinion, would not be compatible with study participation or represent a risk for subjects while in the study. * History of malignant disease within the 5 years prior to Screening (with the exception of basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas of the skin that have been completely excised, in situ prostate cancer with a normal prostate specific antigen). * An estimated Creatinine Clearance (CrCl) of less than 60 mL/minute (using the Cockcroft-Gault formula). * Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT)/Aspartate Aminotransferase (AST) values greater than or equal to 2 times the Upper Limit of Normal range (ULN) or both GGT and ALT values greater than three times the ULN. * Known history of hepatitis B or C or Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) or positive serology at Screening. * Corrected QT interval using Bazett's correction (QTcB) greater than 450 ms or other clinically significant ECG findings. * Receiving tetrabenazine within 4 weeks prior to Baseline. * Taking the following prohibited medications/substances: Strong Cytochrome (CYP) 3A4 inhibitors and Strong CYP3A4 inducers (Wash out prior to Baseline 30 days or 5 half lives,whichever is the longest), CYP2B6 substrates, CYP1A2 substrates, CYP3A4 substrates, CYP2C19 substrates (assessed on a case by case basis)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Numbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).From Day 1 to end of study (a period of up to 7 weeks).The safety and tolerability of BN82451B versus placebo was determined after oral administration b.i.d. for 28 days in patients with HD. Numbers of patients experiencing TEAEs, including information on seriousness, intensity, drug relationship and those leading to withdrawal are presented for all doses of BN82451B and placebo.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)0-12 hours on Days 1, 14 and 28The AUC was determined for BN82451B and its metabolites BN2468 and BN7167 within a dosage interval (0-12 hours) on Days 1, and 14 and 28. Day 1 data represent the AUC after the first dose (AUC\[0-12\]). The data for Days 14 and 28 (AUC\[τ,ss\]) represent the AUC at steady state at the initial cohort dose and following dose escalation, respectively. Data is presented for cohorts 1 and 2, as the study terminated prior to dosing of cohort 3.
Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Days 1, 14 and 28Cmax was determined for BN82451B and its metabolites BN2468 and BN7167 on Days 1, 14 and 28. Day 1 data represent the PK after the first dose (Cmax). The data for Days 14 and 28 represent the Cmax at steady state (Cmax,ss) at the initial cohort dose and following dose escalation, respectively. Data is presented for cohorts 1 and 2, as the study terminated prior to dosing of cohort 3.
Time to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Days 1, 14 and 28Tmax is the empirical time of Cmax and was determined for BN82451B and its metabolites BN2468 and BN7167 on Days 1, 14 and 28. Day 1 data represent the PK after the first dose (Tmax). The data for Days 14 and 28 represent the Tmax at steady state (Tmax,ss) at the initial cohort dose and following dose escalation, respectively. Data is presented for cohorts 1 and 2, as the study terminated prior to dosing of cohort 3.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Position-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Choreatic (involuntary) movements were assessed using Choreomotography by calculating a position-index and orientation-index. Patients were asked to grasp and lift a device equipped with an electromagnetic sensor, and were asked to hold the device as stable as possible. Three dimensional (3D) changes in position (x, y and z) and orientation (roll, pitch and yaw) were recorded and used to calculate a position-index and an orientation-index. This method provided an objective measure of the involuntary movements. 5 trials of 20 seconds duration were performed with each hand, and the start and end of each trial was signalled by a cueing tone. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the position-index of the right and left hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present geometric least squares (GLS) mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Orientation-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28Choreatic (involuntary) movements were assessed using Choreomotography by calculating a position-index and orientation-index. Patients were asked to grasp and lift a device equipped with an electromagnetic sensor, and were asked to hold the device as stable as possible. 3D changes in position (x, y and z) and orientation (roll, pitch and yaw) were recorded and used to calculate a position-index and an orientation-index. This method provided an objective measure of the involuntary movements. 5 trials of 20 seconds duration were performed with each hand, and the start and end of each trial was signalled by a cueing tone. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the orientation-index of the right and left hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Grip Force Variability as Determined by ManumotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28The coordination of isometric grip forces in the precision grip between the thumb and index finger were assessed by Manumotography. Grip forces were assessed during grip initiation, object transport and in a static holding phase. Subjects were instructed to grasp and lift a device equipped with a force transducer and 3D position sensor in the precision grip between thumb and index finger and hold it stable adjacent to a marker 10 centimetres high. Grip forces and 3D position and orientation of the object were recorded. Mean isometric grip forces and grip force variability in the static phase (expressed as coefficient of variation = standard deviation/mean x 100 \[GFV-C\]) were calculated during a 15 second period. 5 trials of 20 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the grip force variability of each hand are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Isometric Grip Forces as Determined by ManumotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28The coordination of isometric grip forces in the precision grip between the thumb and index finger were assessed by Manumotography. Grip forces were assessed during grip initiation, object transport and in a static holding phase. Subjects were instructed to grasp and lift a device equipped with a force transducer and 3D position sensor in the precision grip between thumb and index finger and hold it stable adjacent to a marker 10 centimetres high. Grip forces and 3D position and orientation of the object were recorded. Mean isometric grip forces and grip force variability in the static phase (expressed as coefficient of variation = standard deviation/mean x 100 \[GFV-C\]) were calculated during a 15 second period. 5 trials of 20 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the mean isometric grip forces of each hand are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of tap IOI in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IOI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by DigitomotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of TD in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of TD for the left and right hands are presented a raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of tap IPI in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IPI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of ITI in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of ITI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak Tapping Forces (TF) as Assessed by DigitomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of TD in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the variability of TF for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency (Freq) as Assessed by DigitomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of TD in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The tapping frequency was calculated as the number of taps between the onsets of the first and the last tap divided by the time in between. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the tapping frequency for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IOI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of TD for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IPI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of ITI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the variability of TF for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The tapping frequency was calculated as the number of taps between the onsets of the first and the last tap divided by the time in between. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the tapping frequency for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. GLS mean ratios are in original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by PedomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IOI for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by PedomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of TD for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by PedomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IPI for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by PedomotographyBaseline (Day-1) to Day 28Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of ITI for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by PedomotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the variability of TF for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.
Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by PedomotographyBaseline (Day -1) to Day 28Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The tapping frequency was calculated as the number of taps between the onsets of the first and the last tap divided by the time in between. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the tapping frequency for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Countries

Germany

Participant flow

Recruitment details

The study was a double blind, placebo controlled, randomised, sequential dose ranging repeated dose trial where patients were recruited to a single study centre in Germany. It was planned to enrol 30 patients (10 in each of 3 cohorts). Patients were enrolled to the study from 1 September 2014 until early termination of the study on 31 March 2016.

Pre-assignment details

Male patients 20-70 years with a documented diagnosis of Huntington's Disease (HD) with at least 36 cytosine adenine guanine repeats in the Huntington gene were screened. Eligibile patients needed to meet defined criteria during quantitative motor function assessments. 25 patients were screened, 17 were enrolled and randomised to treatment.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
BN82451B
Patients were randomised to receive oral study medication, BN82451B, b.i.d. from Day 1 to Day 27, under double-blinded conditions. On Day 28 only one morning dose of BN82451B was administered. It was planned for patients to be assigned to 3 cohorts to receive 3 dose levels ranging between 40 and 80 milligrams (mg) b.i.d. For cohort 1, 40 mg BN82451B b.i.d. was administered during the first 14 days. If this dose was well tolerated then it was increased to 60 mg b.i.d. for 13 days and one morning dose of 60 mg on Day 28. For cohort 2, 60 mg BN82451B b.i.d. was administered during the first 14 days. If 60 mg b.i.d was well tolerated then it was increased to 80 mg b.i.d. for 13 days and one morning dose of 80 mg on Day 28. For cohort 3 it was planned to administer 80 mg BN82451B b.i.d for 27 days with one morning dose of 80 mg on Day 28. The study was terminated early before completion of cohort 2.
14
Placebo
Patients were randomised to receive oral placebo b.i.d. from Day 1 to Day 27, under double-blinded conditions. On Day 28 only one morning dose of placebo was administered. It was planned for patients to be assigned to 3 cohorts to receive 3 dose levels ranging between 40 and 80 mg b.i.d. For cohort 1, 40 mg placebo b.i.d. was administered during the first 14 days. If this dose was well tolerated then it was increased to 60 mg b.i.d. for 13 days and one morning dose of 60 mg on Day 28. For cohort 2, 60 mg placebo b.i.d. was administered during the first 14 days. If 60 mg b.i.d was well tolerated then it was increased to 80 mg b.i.d. for 13 days and one morning dose of 80 mg on Day 28. For cohort 3 it was planned to administer 80 mg placebo b.i.d for 27 days with one morning dose of 80 mg on Day 28. The study was terminated early before completion of cohort 2.
3
Total Title17
Total34

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdverse Event50

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicBN82451BPlaceboTotal Title
Age, Continuous46.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.4
50.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.7
46.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.4
Sex: Female, Male
Female
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
14 Participants3 Participants17 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
11 / 142 / 3
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 140 / 3

Outcome results

Primary

Numbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).

The safety and tolerability of BN82451B versus placebo was determined after oral administration b.i.d. for 28 days in patients with HD. Numbers of patients experiencing TEAEs, including information on seriousness, intensity, drug relationship and those leading to withdrawal are presented for all doses of BN82451B and placebo.

Time frame: From Day 1 to end of study (a period of up to 7 weeks).

Population: The Safety Population consisted of all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study medication.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
BN82451BNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with any TEAEs11 Participants
BN82451BNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with any serious TEAE0 Participants
BN82451BNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with at least 1 severe TEAE0 Participants
BN82451BNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with at least 1 moderate TEAE8 Participants
BN82451BNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with at least 1 mild TEAE11 Participants
BN82451BNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with TEAEs related to study medication9 Participants
BN82451BNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with TEAEs leading to withdrawal5 Participants
BN82451BNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with any TEAEs leading to death0 Participants
PlaceboNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with any TEAEs leading to death0 Participants
PlaceboNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with any TEAEs2 Participants
PlaceboNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with at least 1 mild TEAE1 Participants
PlaceboNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with any serious TEAE0 Participants
PlaceboNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with TEAEs leading to withdrawal0 Participants
PlaceboNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with at least 1 severe TEAE0 Participants
PlaceboNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with TEAEs related to study medication0 Participants
PlaceboNumbers of Patients Experiencing Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs).Patients with at least 1 moderate TEAE1 Participants
Secondary

Area Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)

The AUC was determined for BN82451B and its metabolites BN2468 and BN7167 within a dosage interval (0-12 hours) on Days 1, and 14 and 28. Day 1 data represent the AUC after the first dose (AUC\[0-12\]). The data for Days 14 and 28 (AUC\[τ,ss\]) represent the AUC at steady state at the initial cohort dose and following dose escalation, respectively. Data is presented for cohorts 1 and 2, as the study terminated prior to dosing of cohort 3.

Time frame: 0-12 hours on Days 1, 14 and 28

Population: The PK population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who had no major protocol deviations affecting the PK variables and who had a sufficient number of plasma BN82451B concentrations to estimate the main PK parameters.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 14 BN82451B AUCτ,ss1521.11 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 593.22
BN82451BArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 1 BN82451B AUC(0-12)512.93 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 112.53
BN82451BArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 14 BN7167 AUC(τ,ss)33.39 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 20.08
BN82451BArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 28 BN2468 AUC(τ,ss)1509.67 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 105.94
BN82451BArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 28 BN82451B AUC(τ,ss)2357.95 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 977.74
BN82451BArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 1 BN2468 AUC(0-12)90.66 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 40.68
BN82451BArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 1 BN7167 AUC(0-12)16.82 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 9.01
BN82451BArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 14 BN2468 AUC(τ,ss)735.51 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 203.91
BN82451BArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 28 BN7167 AUC(τ,ss)34.64 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 16.05
PlaceboArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 28 BN7167 AUC(τ,ss)63.81 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 57.7
PlaceboArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 14 BN2468 AUC(τ,ss)1531.00 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 412.43
PlaceboArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 1 BN82451B AUC(0-12)783.78 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 144.45
PlaceboArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 1 BN7167 AUC(0-12)31.67 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 24.63
PlaceboArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 14 BN82451B AUCτ,ss2594.05 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 1077.08
PlaceboArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 14 BN7167 AUC(τ,ss)46.73 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 36.76
PlaceboArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 28 BN82451B AUC(τ,ss)3313.45 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 1517.6
PlaceboArea Under the Plasma Concentration Time Curve (AUC)Day 28 BN2468 AUC(τ,ss)1936.35 hours*nanograms per millilitre (h*ng/mL)Standard Deviation 569.97
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by Digitomotography

Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of tap IOI in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IOI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger IOI variability0.039 secondsStandard Deviation 0.048
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger IOI variability0.057 secondsStandard Deviation 0.062
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger IOI duration0.088 secondsStandard Deviation 0.075
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger IOI duration0.069 secondsStandard Deviation 0.059
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger IOI duration0.032 secondsStandard Deviation 0.031
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger IOI variability-0.009 secondsStandard Deviation 0.002
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger IOI duration-0.015 secondsStandard Deviation 0.041
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Onset Intervals (IOI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger IOI variability0.038 secondsStandard Deviation 0.049
Comparison: Left finger IOI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.057490% CI: [1.06, 2.15]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger IOI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.827790% CI: [0.662, 1.372]MMRM
Comparison: Left finger IOI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.016290% CI: [1.074, 1.426]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger IOI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.63290% CI: [0.912, 1.182]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by Digitomotography

Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of tap IPI in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IPI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger IPI variability0.040 secondsStandard Deviation 0.049
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger IPI variability0.057 secondsStandard Deviation 0.067
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger IPI duration0.088 secondsStandard Deviation 0.076
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger IPI duration0.069 secondsStandard Deviation 0.059
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger IPI duration0.031 secondsStandard Deviation 0.03
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger IPI variability-0.009 secondsStandard Deviation 0.007
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger IPI duration-0.017 secondsStandard Deviation 0.042
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Peak Intervals (IPI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger IPI variability0.038 secondsStandard Deviation 0.044
Comparison: Left finger IPI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.032690% CI: [1.124, 2.331]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger IPI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.601690% CI: [0.605, 1.299]MMRM
Comparison: Left finger IPI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.015290% CI: [1.077, 1.433]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger IPI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.603390% CI: [0.915, 1.186]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by Digitomotography

Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of ITI in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of ITI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger ITI Variability0.041 secondsStandard Deviation 0.05
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger ITI Variability0.053 secondsStandard Deviation 0.068
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger ITI Duration0.056 secondsStandard Deviation 0.048
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger ITI Duration0.078 secondsStandard Deviation 0.076
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger ITI Duration0.03 secondsStandard Deviation 0.046
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger ITI Variability-0.007 secondsStandard Deviation 0.01
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger ITI Variability0.03 secondsStandard Deviation 0.034
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Inter Tap Intervals (ITI) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger ITI Duration-0.005 secondsStandard Deviation 0.006
Comparison: Left finger ITI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.05290% CI: [1.086, 2.529]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger ITI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.697890% CI: [0.63, 1.333]MMRM
Comparison: Left finger ITI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.052290% CI: [1.043, 1.614]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger ITI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.901290% CI: [0.837, 1.229]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by Dysdiadochomotography

Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IOI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand IOI variability0.031 secondsStandard Deviation 0.094
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand IOI variability0.032 secondsStandard Deviation 0.135
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand IOI duration0.054 secondsStandard Deviation 0.114
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand IOI duration0.074 secondsStandard Deviation 0.101
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand IOI variability0.163 secondsStandard Deviation 0.276
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand IOI duration0.074 secondsStandard Deviation 0.132
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand IOI duration0.028 secondsStandard Deviation 0.043
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand IOI variability0.036 secondsStandard Deviation 0.023
Comparison: Left hand IOI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.617690% CI: [0.697, 1.955]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand IOI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.454190% CI: [0.411, 1.399]MMRM
Comparison: Left hand IOI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.201890% CI: [0.967, 1.294]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand IOI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.652790% CI: [0.886, 1.234]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by Pedomotography

Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IOI for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot IOI variability0.120 secondsStandard Deviation 0.177
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot IOI variability0.146 secondsStandard Deviation 0.353
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot IOI duration0.109 secondsStandard Deviation 0.354
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot IOI duration0.267 secondsStandard Deviation 0.461
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot IOI duration-0.123 secondsStandard Deviation 0.199
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot IOI variability-0.1 secondsStandard Deviation 0.122
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot IOI variability0.090 secondsStandard Deviation 0.15
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IOI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot IOI duration0.075 secondsStandard Deviation 0.164
Comparison: Left foot IOI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.01590% CI: [1.295, 3.614]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot IOI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.513690% CI: [0.688, 2.361]MMRM
Comparison: Left foot IOI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.021890% CI: [1.139, 2.137]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot IOI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.37290% CI: [0.825, 1.899]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by Dysdiadochomotography

Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IPI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand IPI variability0.045 secondsStandard Deviation 0.124
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand IPI variability0.027 secondsStandard Deviation 0.07
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand IPI duration0.057 secondsStandard Deviation 0.109
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand IPI duration0.079 secondsStandard Deviation 0.105
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand IPI duration0.066 secondsStandard Deviation 0.118
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand IPI variability0.049 secondsStandard Deviation 0.046
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand IPI duration0.029 secondsStandard Deviation 0.04
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand IPI variability0.131 secondsStandard Deviation 0.219
Comparison: Left hand IPI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.675990% CI: [0.677, 1.917]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand IPI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.576490% CI: [0.444, 1.496]MMRM
Comparison: Left hand IPI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.212790% CI: [0.965, 1.289]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand IPI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.566190% CI: [0.897, 1.25]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by Pedomotography

Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of IPI for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot IPI variability0.115 secondsStandard Deviation 0.248
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot IPI variability0.117 secondsStandard Deviation 0.15
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot IPI duration0.117 secondsStandard Deviation 0.383
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot IPI duration0.295 secondsStandard Deviation 0.469
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot IPI duration0.073 secondsStandard Deviation 0.158
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot IPI variability-0.108 secondsStandard Deviation 0.131
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot IPI duration-0.123 secondsStandard Deviation 0.206
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of IPI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot IPI variability0.098 secondsStandard Deviation 0.164
Comparison: Left foot IPI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.007990% CI: [1.381, 3.737]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot IPI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.020490% CI: [0.686, 2.133]MMRM
Comparison: Left foot IPI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.020490% CI: [1.144, 2.138]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot IPI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.314490% CI: [0.856, 1.884]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by Dysdiadochomotography

Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of ITI for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand ITI variability0.036 secondsStandard Deviation 0.061
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand ITI duration0.064 secondsStandard Deviation 0.07
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand ITI variability0.053 secondsStandard Deviation 0.082
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand ITI duration0.094 secondsStandard Deviation 0.097
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand ITI variability0.017 secondsStandard Deviation 0.018
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand ITI variability0.015 secondsStandard Deviation 0.017
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand ITI duration0.022 secondsStandard Deviation 0.014
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand ITI duration0.006 secondsStandard Deviation 0.029
Comparison: Left hand ITI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.087490% CI: [1.018, 2.424]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand ITI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.643190% CI: [0.644, 2.162]MMRM
Comparison: Left hand ITI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.038990% CI: [1.038, 1.371]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand ITI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.164190% CI: [0.976, 1.327]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by Pedomotography

Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of ITI for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot ITI variability0.003 secondsStandard Deviation 0.203
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot ITI variability0.023 secondsStandard Deviation 0.118
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot ITI duration-0.049 secondsStandard Deviation 0.232
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot ITI duration-0.016 secondsStandard Deviation 0.121
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot ITI duration-0.012 secondsStandard Deviation 0.056
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot ITI variability-0.047 secondsStandard Deviation 0.108
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot ITI duration-0.076 secondsStandard Deviation 0.092
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of ITI as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot ITI variability-0.016 secondsStandard Deviation 0.089
Comparison: Left foot ITI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.032490% CI: [1.167, 3.141]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot ITI variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.24690% CI: [0.85, 2.515]MMRM
Comparison: Left foot ITI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.105790% CI: [0.994, 1.935]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot ITI duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.734290% CI: [0.758, 1.523]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by Digitomotography

Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of TD in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of TD for the left and right hands are presented a raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger Variability of TD0.007 secondsStandard Deviation 0.024
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger Variability of TD0.017 secondsStandard Deviation 0.016
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger Duration of TD0.010 secondsStandard Deviation 0.021
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger Duration of TD0.012 secondsStandard Deviation 0.021
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger Duration of TD0.001 secondsStandard Deviation 0.025
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger Variability of TD-0.007 secondsStandard Deviation 0.015
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger Duration of TD-0.011 secondsStandard Deviation 0.039
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of Tap Durations (TD) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger Variability of TD0.012 secondsStandard Deviation 0.017
Comparison: Left finger variability of TD statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.300590% CI: [0.85, 2.014]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger variability of TD statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.479390% CI: [0.804, 1.722]MMRM
Comparison: Left finger duration of TD statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.265390% CI: [0.934, 1.416]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger duration of TD statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.677790% CI: [0.875, 1.248]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by Dysdiadochomotography

Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of TD for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand variability of TD0.001 secondsStandard Deviation 0.138
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand variability of TD-0.012 secondsStandard Deviation 0.073
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand duration of TD-0.006 secondsStandard Deviation 0.088
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand duration of TD-0.019 secondsStandard Deviation 0.089
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand duration of TD0.022 secondsStandard Deviation 0.069
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand variability of TD0.023 secondsStandard Deviation 0.026
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand duration of TD0.017 secondsStandard Deviation 0.027
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand variability of TD0.078 secondsStandard Deviation 0.128
Comparison: Left hand variability of TD statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.827990% CI: [0.529, 1.63]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand variability of TD statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.273890% CI: [0.292, 1.283]MMRM
Comparison: Left hand duration of TD statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.921890% CI: [0.752, 1.378]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand duration of TD statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.503290% CI: [0.561, 1.277]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by Pedomotography

Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the duration and variability of TD for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot TD variability0.225 secondsStandard Deviation 0.332
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot TD duration0.179 secondsStandard Deviation 0.28
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot TD duration0.358 secondsStandard Deviation 0.609
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot TD variability0.306 secondsStandard Deviation 0.566
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot TD duration0.083 secondsStandard Deviation 0.133
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot TD variability-0.056 secondsStandard Deviation 0.058
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot TD variability0.105 secondsStandard Deviation 0.14
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Duration and Variability of TD as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot TD duration-0.040 secondsStandard Deviation 0.106
Comparison: Left foot TD variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.91590% CI: [1.017, 3.592]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot TD variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.274590% CI: [0.762, 3.737]MMRM
Comparison: Left foot TD duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.114890% CI: [0.98, 2.608]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot TD duration statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.30890% CI: [0.789, 2.679]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Grip Force Variability as Determined by Manumotography

The coordination of isometric grip forces in the precision grip between the thumb and index finger were assessed by Manumotography. Grip forces were assessed during grip initiation, object transport and in a static holding phase. Subjects were instructed to grasp and lift a device equipped with a force transducer and 3D position sensor in the precision grip between thumb and index finger and hold it stable adjacent to a marker 10 centimetres high. Grip forces and 3D position and orientation of the object were recorded. Mean isometric grip forces and grip force variability in the static phase (expressed as coefficient of variation = standard deviation/mean x 100 \[GFV-C\]) were calculated during a 15 second period. 5 trials of 20 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the grip force variability of each hand are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Grip Force Variability as Determined by ManumotographyLeft hand grip force variability5.74 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 4.38
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Grip Force Variability as Determined by ManumotographyRight hand grip force variability5.82 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 7.94
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Grip Force Variability as Determined by ManumotographyRight hand grip force variability2.35 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 1.17
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Grip Force Variability as Determined by ManumotographyLeft hand grip force variability2.61 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 4.57
Comparison: Left hand grip force variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.286590% CI: [0.886, 1.756]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand grip force variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.533890% CI: [0.781, 1.724]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Isometric Grip Forces as Determined by Manumotography

The coordination of isometric grip forces in the precision grip between the thumb and index finger were assessed by Manumotography. Grip forces were assessed during grip initiation, object transport and in a static holding phase. Subjects were instructed to grasp and lift a device equipped with a force transducer and 3D position sensor in the precision grip between thumb and index finger and hold it stable adjacent to a marker 10 centimetres high. Grip forces and 3D position and orientation of the object were recorded. Mean isometric grip forces and grip force variability in the static phase (expressed as coefficient of variation = standard deviation/mean x 100 \[GFV-C\]) were calculated during a 15 second period. 5 trials of 20 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the mean isometric grip forces of each hand are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Isometric Grip Forces as Determined by ManumotographyLeft hand isometric grip forces-0.75 NewtonStandard Deviation 2.86
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Isometric Grip Forces as Determined by ManumotographyRight hand isometric grip forces-2.06 NewtonStandard Deviation 6
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Isometric Grip Forces as Determined by ManumotographyRight hand isometric grip forces0.91 NewtonStandard Deviation 1.67
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Isometric Grip Forces as Determined by ManumotographyLeft hand isometric grip forces1.55 NewtonStandard Deviation 1.99
Comparison: Left hand isometric grip forces statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.086490% CI: [0.487, 0.985]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand isometric grip forces statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.039990% CI: [0.508, 0.925]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by Dysdiadochomotography

Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The tapping frequency was calculated as the number of taps between the onsets of the first and the last tap divided by the time in between. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the tapping frequency for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. GLS mean ratios are in original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand freq-0.185 HertzStandard Deviation 0.402
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand freq-0.236 HertzStandard Deviation 0.349
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand freq-0.073 HertzStandard Deviation 0.088
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand freq-0.121 HertzStandard Deviation 0.189
Comparison: Left hand freq statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.124490% CI: [0.765, 1.009]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand freq statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.353590% CI: [0.789, 1.069]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by Pedomotography

Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The tapping frequency was calculated as the number of taps between the onsets of the first and the last tap divided by the time in between. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the tapping frequency for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot freq-0.259 HertzStandard Deviation 0.513
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot freq-0.383 HertzStandard Deviation 0.481
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot freq0.556 HertzStandard Deviation 0.678
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot freq-0.18 HertzStandard Deviation 0.55
Comparison: Left foot freq statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.03590% CI: [0.53, 0.922]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot freq statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.355690% CI: [0.64, 1.136]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency (Freq) as Assessed by Digitomotography

Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of TD in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The tapping frequency was calculated as the number of taps between the onsets of the first and the last tap divided by the time in between. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the tapping frequency for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency (Freq) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger freq-0.492 HertzStandard Deviation 0.382
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency (Freq) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger freq-0.466 HertzStandard Deviation 0.389
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency (Freq) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger freq-0.001 HertzStandard Deviation 0.315
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Tapping Frequency (Freq) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger freq-0.365 HertzStandard Deviation 0.231
Comparison: Left finger freq statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.017790% CI: [0.706, 0.935]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger freq statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.649190% CI: [0.856, 1.093]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak Tapping Forces (TF) as Assessed by Digitomotography

Digitomotography was used to assess the duration and the variability of TD in an index finger speeded tapping task. The patient placed their hand on a hand rest with their index finger positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to finger tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the variability of TF for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak Tapping Forces (TF) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger TF0.65 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 6.97
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak Tapping Forces (TF) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger TF3.75 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 12.86
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak Tapping Forces (TF) as Assessed by DigitomotographyLeft finger TF-6.43 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 6.26
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak Tapping Forces (TF) as Assessed by DigitomotographyRight finger TF-0.11 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 8.26
Comparison: Left finger TF statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.177990% CI: [0.96, 1.494]MMRM
Comparison: Right finger TF statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.803690% CI: [0.765, 1.22]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by Dysdiadochomotography

Dysdiadochomotography was used to assess the regularity of hand taps performed when alternating between the palm and dorsal surface of the hand performing a repetitive pronation/supination movement. The force and duration of the hand taps were recorded, with their hand positioned on a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to hand tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each hand. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the variability of TF for the left and right hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand TF variability3.50 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 7.44
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand TF variability2.5 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 10.87
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyLeft hand TF variability9.98 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 2.22
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by DysdiadochomotographyRight hand TF variability3.61 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 2.42
Comparison: Left hand TF variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.566890% CI: [0.755, 1.147]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand TF variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.868690% CI: [0.778, 1.229]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by Pedomotography

Pedomotography was used to assess the tap duration and variability in a foot speeded tapping task. The patient placed their foot on the foot device such that the ball of the foot was positioned above a force transducer, and recordings were started after practice runs. The patient was then instructed to foot tap as fast as possible between 2 auditory cues. The beginning of a tap was defined as a rise of the force by 0.05 N above maximal baseline level. The tap ended when it dropped to 0.05 N before the maximal baseline level was reached again. 5 trials of 10 seconds duration were performed with each foot. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the variability of TF for the left and right feet are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot TF variability11.63 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 16.38
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot TF variability-2.52 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 22.35
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by PedomotographyLeft foot TF variability-20.19 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 34.3
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Mean Variability of Peak TF as Assessed by PedomotographyRight foot TF variability-18.31 percentage of variationStandard Deviation 6.52
Comparison: Left foot TF variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.102790% CI: [0.997, 1.943]MMRM
Comparison: Right foot TF variability statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.449490% CI: [0.84, 1.595]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Orientation-index as Determined by Choreomotography

Choreatic (involuntary) movements were assessed using Choreomotography by calculating a position-index and orientation-index. Patients were asked to grasp and lift a device equipped with an electromagnetic sensor, and were asked to hold the device as stable as possible. 3D changes in position (x, y and z) and orientation (roll, pitch and yaw) were recorded and used to calculate a position-index and an orientation-index. This method provided an objective measure of the involuntary movements. 5 trials of 20 seconds duration were performed with each hand, and the start and end of each trial was signalled by a cueing tone. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the orientation-index of the right and left hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present GLS mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day -1) to Day 28

Population: The PD population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting Q-motor evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Orientation-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyLeft hand orientation-index0.131 radians per second (radians/s)Standard Deviation 0.125
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Orientation-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyRight hand orientation-index0.098 radians per second (radians/s)Standard Deviation 0.087
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Orientation-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyRight hand orientation-index0.054 radians per second (radians/s)Standard Deviation 0.045
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Orientation-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyLeft hand orientation-index0.082 radians per second (radians/s)Standard Deviation 0.1
Comparison: Left hand orientation-index statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.893790% CI: [0.675, 1.587]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand orientation-index statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.63690% CI: [0.8, 1.493]MMRM
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Day 28 in the Position-index as Determined by Choreomotography

Choreatic (involuntary) movements were assessed using Choreomotography by calculating a position-index and orientation-index. Patients were asked to grasp and lift a device equipped with an electromagnetic sensor, and were asked to hold the device as stable as possible. Three dimensional (3D) changes in position (x, y and z) and orientation (roll, pitch and yaw) were recorded and used to calculate a position-index and an orientation-index. This method provided an objective measure of the involuntary movements. 5 trials of 20 seconds duration were performed with each hand, and the start and end of each trial was signalled by a cueing tone. The mean changes from Baseline to Day 28 in the position-index of the right and left hands are presented as raw data. The statistical analyses present geometric least squares (GLS) mean ratios in the original units.

Time frame: Baseline (Day-1) to Day 28

Population: The Pharmacodynamic (PD) population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who have not reported major protocol violations impacting quantitative measures of motor function (Q-motor) evaluation and who have a Q-motor evaluation assessed both at Baseline (Day -1) and at one post baseline visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Position-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyLeft hand position-index0.021 metres per second (m/s)Standard Deviation 0.024
BN82451BChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Position-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyRight hand position-index0.018 metres per second (m/s)Standard Deviation 0.014
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Position-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyLeft hand position-index0.009 metres per second (m/s)Standard Deviation 0.007
PlaceboChange From Baseline to Day 28 in the Position-index as Determined by ChoreomotographyRight hand position-index0.009 metres per second (m/s)Standard Deviation 0.006
Comparison: Left hand position-index statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The Mixed Effect Model Repeat Measurement (MMRM) analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the restricted maximum likelihood (REML) model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.574390% CI: [0.823, 1.482]MMRM
Comparison: Right hand position-index statistical analysis is presented (BN82451B versus Placebo). The MMRM analysis was performed on log-transformed data using the REML model including fixed categorical effects of treatment/cohort group, visit and treatment/cohort by visit interaction as well as the continuous fixed covariate of baseline value. Cohort was fitted as random effect.p-value: =0.434990% CI: [0.862, 1.51]MMRM
Secondary

Peak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)

Cmax was determined for BN82451B and its metabolites BN2468 and BN7167 on Days 1, 14 and 28. Day 1 data represent the PK after the first dose (Cmax). The data for Days 14 and 28 represent the Cmax at steady state (Cmax,ss) at the initial cohort dose and following dose escalation, respectively. Data is presented for cohorts 1 and 2, as the study terminated prior to dosing of cohort 3.

Time frame: Days 1, 14 and 28

Population: The PK population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who had no major protocol deviations affecting the PK variables and who had a sufficient number of plasma BN82451B concentrations to estimate the main PK parameters.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BN82451BPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 1 BN2468 Cmax9.03 ng/mLStandard Deviation 4.14
BN82451BPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 14 BN7167 Cmax,ss4.90 ng/mLStandard Deviation 2.35
BN82451BPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 14 BN82451B Cmax,ss162.88 ng/mLStandard Deviation 56.31
BN82451BPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 28 BN82451B Cmax,ss251.77 ng/mLStandard Deviation 105.64
BN82451BPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 1 BN7167 Cmax3.62 ng/mLStandard Deviation 1.62
BN82451BPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 28 BN2468 Cmax,ss135.19 ng/mLStandard Deviation 5.06
BN82451BPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 14 BN2468 Cmax,ss75.34 ng/mLStandard Deviation 15.16
BN82451BPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 28 BN 7167 Cmax,ss5.51 ng/mLStandard Deviation 1.82
BN82451BPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 1 BN82451B Cmax71.61 ng/mLStandard Deviation 14.81
PlaceboPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 28 BN 7167 Cmax,ss9.54 ng/mLStandard Deviation 6.92
PlaceboPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 1 BN82451B Cmax101.45 ng/mLStandard Deviation 16.25
PlaceboPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 1 BN2468 Cmax18.87 ng/mLStandard Deviation 13
PlaceboPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 1 BN7167 Cmax5.61 ng/mLStandard Deviation 3.62
PlaceboPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 14 BN82451B Cmax,ss271.64 ng/mLStandard Deviation 99.9
PlaceboPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 14 BN2468 Cmax,ss125.34 ng/mLStandard Deviation 38.13
PlaceboPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 14 BN7167 Cmax,ss6.28 ng/mLStandard Deviation 3.55
PlaceboPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 28 BN82451B Cmax,ss340.41 ng/mLStandard Deviation 156.61
PlaceboPeak Plasma Concentration (Cmax)Day 28 BN2468 Cmax,ss171.64 ng/mLStandard Deviation 47.64
Secondary

Time to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)

Tmax is the empirical time of Cmax and was determined for BN82451B and its metabolites BN2468 and BN7167 on Days 1, 14 and 28. Day 1 data represent the PK after the first dose (Tmax). The data for Days 14 and 28 represent the Tmax at steady state (Tmax,ss) at the initial cohort dose and following dose escalation, respectively. Data is presented for cohorts 1 and 2, as the study terminated prior to dosing of cohort 3.

Time frame: Days 1, 14 and 28

Population: The PK population consisted of all subjects from the safety population who had no major protocol deviations affecting the PK variables and who had a sufficient number of plasma BN82451B concentrations to estimate the main PK parameters.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
BN82451BTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 14 BN2468 Tmax,ss4 hours
BN82451BTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 1 BN7167 Tmax1.00 hours
BN82451BTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 14 BN7167 Tmax,ss1 hours
BN82451BTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 1 BN2468 Tmax9.98 hours
BN82451BTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 28 BN82451B Tmax,ss3 hours
BN82451BTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 28 BN2468 Tmax,ss4.06 hours
BN82451BTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 14 BN82451B Tmax,ss3.0 hours
BN82451BTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 28 BN7167 Tmax,ss1 hours
BN82451BTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 1 BN82451B Tmax3.0 hours
PlaceboTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 28 BN7167 Tmax,ss1.52 hours
PlaceboTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 1 BN82451B Tmax2.51 hours
PlaceboTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 1 BN2468 Tmax11.92 hours
PlaceboTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 1 BN7167 Tmax1.00 hours
PlaceboTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 14 BN82451B Tmax,ss3.0 hours
PlaceboTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 14 BN2468 Tmax,ss2.51 hours
PlaceboTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 14 BN7167 Tmax,ss1 hours
PlaceboTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 28 BN2468 Tmax,ss2.06 hours
PlaceboTime to Peak Plasma Concentration (Tmax)Day 28 BN82451B Tmax,ss2.56 hours

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 1, 2026