Generalized Myasthenia Gravis
Conditions
Keywords
M281, Generalized Myasthenia Gravis
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of M281 in participants with generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG)
Interventions
M281 injection administered as intravenous infusion
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
Participants must be ≥18 years of age with a documented history of Generalized Myasthenia Gravis (gMG) and clinical signs/symptoms of gMG, not pregnant or breastfeeding, previously participated in the MOM-281-004 study, had no major eligibility deviations or other major protocol deviations or not met any of the stopping criteria or discontinued study drug in the MOM-M281-004 study for any reason other than the need for rescue therapy as specified in the MOM-M281-004 study. Additional, more specific criteria are defined in the protocol.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | Up to 257 days post-baseline | Number of participants with at least one value above upper limit of normal (\>ULN) or below the lower limit of normal (\< LLN) value of coagulation parameters (activated partial thromboplastin time \[APTT\] and prothrombin time \[PT\]) were reported. The lab reference range for APTT is 25.1 to 36.5 seconds. The lab reference range for PT is 9.4 to 12.5 seconds. |
| Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in chemistry laboratory parameters: bilirubin, creatinine and direct bilirubin were reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes (Red Blood Cell) | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in erythrocytes (red blood cells) (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in hematology laboratory parameters: basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, platelets and leukocytes were reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB) Concentration | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in erythrocytes mean corpuscular hemoglobin (HGB) concentration (hematology laboratory parameter) were reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hematocrit | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in hematocrit (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hemoglobin | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in hemoglobin (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: pH | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in pH (urinalysis laboratory parameter) was reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: Specific Gravity | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in specific gravity (urinalysis laboratory parameter) was reported. |
| Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | Up to 257 days post-baseline | Number of participants with treatment-emergent abnormal ECG values for variables including mean heart rate (abnormally low refers to less than or equal to \[\<=\] 50 beats per minute \[bpm\], abnormally high refers greater than or equal to \[\>=\] 120 bpm), PR interval (abnormally low refers to \< 120 and abnormally high refers to \>200 milliseconds \[msec\]), RR interval (abnormally low refers to \<600 msec and abnormally high refers to \>1200 msec) and QRS duration (abnormally \> 120) were reported. |
| Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | Up to 257 days post-baseline | Number of participants with C-SSRS scores were reported. C-SSRS is a clinician-administered questionnaire designed to solicit occurrence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related ideation and behaviors. Total score ranges from 1 to 10, score of 0 was assigned (0=no event that can be assessed based on C-SSRS). Higher total scores indicate greater severity. Maximum score assigned for each participant was summarized into one of 3 categories: no suicidal ideation or behavior (0), suicidal ideation (1 to 5): higher score indicates more suicidal ideation, suicidal behavior (6 to 10): higher score indicates more suicidal behavior. Suicidal ideation includes participants who did not have suicidal ideation or behavior at baseline and had suicidal ideation without behavior at some time point post-baseline. Suicidal behavior includes participants who did not have suicidal ideation or behavior at baseline and had suicidal behavior at some time point post-baseline (baseline=Day 1). |
| Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB) | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in erythrocytes mean corpuscular HGB (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Volume | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in erythrocytes mean corpuscular volume (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported. |
| Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) | Up to 257 days post-baseline (Baseline is Day 1) | Number of participants with TEAEs were reported. An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical event that occurs in a participant administered an investigational product and it does not necessarily indicate only events with clear causal relationship with the relevant investigational product. TEAEs are defined as any AE occurring during or after the initiation of the first infusion of study drug in this study. |
| Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) | Up to 257 days post-baseline | An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical event that occurs in a participant administered an investigational product and it does not necessarily indicate only events with clear causal relationship with the relevant investigational product. SAE is defined as any AE occurring at any dose that results in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening AE, hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, a persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect. |
| Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) | Up to 257 days post-baseline | Number of participants with treatment-emergent AESIs were reported. Severe infections and hypoalbuminemia (Grade 3 or higher according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events \[CTCAE\] v5.0) were considered as AESIs. |
| Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | Up to 257 days post-baseline | Number of participants with treatment-emergent abnormal vital signs including pulse rate (less than or equal to \[\<=\] 50 beats per minutes \[bpm\] with greater than or equal to \[\>=\] 15 bpm decrease from baseline, \>= 120 bpm with \>=15 bpm increase from baseline), systolic blood pressure (SBP) (\<= 90 millimeters of mercury \[mmHg\] with \>= 20 mmHg decrease from baseline, \>= 160 mmHg with \>= 20 mmHg increase from baseline) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (\<= 50 mmHg with \>=15 mmHg decrease from baseline, \>=100 mmHg with \>=15 mmHg decrease from baseline) were reported. |
| Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Week 12 | Number of participants with abnormalities in physical examinations (abdomen, head, ears, eyes, nose, throat, and sinuses, lungs, neurological, skin, blood and lymphatic system, cardiovascular, chest, gastrointestinal, general appearance and musculoskeletal) were reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Albumin and Protein | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in chemistry laboratory parameters: albumin and protein were reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in chemistry laboratory parameters: bicarbonate, calcium, chloride, cholesterol, glucose, phosphate, potassium, sodium, triglycerides, urate and urea nitrogen were reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Baseline up to Week 12 | Change from baseline in chemistry laboratory parameters alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), creatine kinase, gamma glutamyl transferase, lactate dehydrogenase were reported. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or greater than or equal to (\>=) 8-point improvement in total MG-ADL score over time were reported. MG-ADL was used to assess the participant's MG symptom severity. It assesses eight functions (talking, chewing, swallowing, breathing, impairment of ability to brush teeth or comb hair, impairment of ability to arise from a chair, double vision, and eyelid droop) which were rated on a 4-point scale: 0 (no impairment) to 3 (severe impairment). The total score is the sum of the eight function scores and ranges from 0 to 24. Higher scores indicated greater symptom severity/difficulty in performing daily living activities. |
| Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Baseline up to Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | The QMG test was used to assess the participant's strength. The quantitative results of each of the 13 strength components were mapped to a 4-point scale where 0 equals to (=) none, 1= mild, 2= moderate and 3= severe. The total score is the sum of the 13 scale scores and ranges from 0 to 39. Higher scores indicated more severe impairment. |
| Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Baseline up to Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | The MG-QoL15r was used to assess the participant's limitations related to living with MG. It consists of 15 questions and each of the 15 questions were rated by the participant on a 3-point scale (0= Not at all, 1= somewhat, 2=very much) based on a recall period of over the past few weeks. The total score is the sum of the 15 question scores and ranges from 0 to 30. Higher scores indicated more limitation. |
| Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Baseline up to Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | The CGI-S scale is the clinician/physician's global assessment of participants illness severity of MG and is rated by answering on 8-point scale. Considering total clinical experience, participant is assessed on severity of illness according to: 0=not performed; 1=normal, not at all ill; 2=borderline illness; 3=mildly ill; 4=moderately ill; 5=markedly ill; 6=severely ill; 7=among most extremely ill patients. Higher scores indicated more severity of illness. Values of 0 (not assessed) were excluded from analysis. CGI-S permits global evaluation of participant's condition at given time. |
| Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | Number of participants with improvement of illness based on CGI-I scale score over time were reported. The CGI-I scale is the clinician/physician's global assessment of the change in severity of the patient's generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG) since starting this study. The rating is given on a 7-point scale with lower scores indicating greater improvement (1= Very much improved; 2 = Much improved; 3 = Minimally improved; 4 = No change; 5 =Minimally worse; 6 = Much worse; 7 = Very much worse. Values of 0 (not assessed) were excluded from analysis. Higher score indicates more severity. |
| Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Weeks 8, 24 and End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline) | Number of participants with change from baseline in MGFA classification score over time were reported. The MGFA was used to assess the participant's MG severity. MGFA classification identifies the subgroup participants with MG who share distinct clinical features or severity of disease: Class I (ocular MG), classes II, III and IV generalized MG with mild, moderate and severe disease, respectively; Class V MG crisis. Separate subclasses under classes II, III and IV are designed: a if the predominant weakness is affecting limb/axial weakness or both; subclass b if the predominant weakness is affecting oropharyngeal or respiratory muscles or both. In the MGFA classification, lower roman numerals mean less severity. Changes in MGFA classification (regardless of subclass) are categorized as Improved (example, III to II), Same (example, II to II), or Worsened (example, II to III). |
| Number of Participants With Anti-drug Antibodies (ADA) to Nipocalimab | Up to 257 days post-baseline | Number of participants with ADA to nipocalimab were reported. The presence of ADA to nipocalimab in serum was determined by a sensitive and drug-tolerant electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) method. |
| Number of Participants With Neutralizing Antibodies (NAbs) to Nipocalimab | Up to 257 days post-baseline | Number of participants with NAbs were reported. Neutralizing antibodies to nipocalimab were assessed using a non-cell based competitive ligand binding ECLIA assay. |
| Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Baseline to Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, up to 253 days post-baseline, up to 257 days post-baseline | Change from baseline in serum immunoglobulin (Ig)G concentration over time was reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Baseline up to Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | The MG-ADL was used to assess the participant's MG symptom severity. It assesses eight functions (talking, chewing, swallowing, breathing, impairment of ability to brush teeth or comb hair, impairment of ability to arise from a chair, double vision, and eyelid droop) which were rated on a 4-point scale: 0 (no impairment) to 3 (severe impairment). The total score is the sum of the eight function scores and ranges from 0 to 24. Higher scores indicated greater symptom severity/difficulty in performing daily living activities. |
Countries
Belgium, Canada, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, United Kingdom, United States
Participant flow
Pre-assignment details
Participants from study MOM-M281-004 (NCT03772587) who completed the Day 113 visit of that study were eligible to enroll in this open-label extension study (MOM-M281-005). The Day 113 visit of MOM-M281-004 occurred approximately 8 weeks after the last dose in that study.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab Participants who received placebo in MOM-M281-004 (NCT03772587) study rolled-over and received intravenous (IV) infusion of nipocalimab (M281) 30 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) every 4 weeks (Q4W) starting Day 1 up to 8 weeks. After 8 weeks of treatment on a stable dose of nipocalimab, the dose and/or dosing frequency could be individually adjusted, at the investigator's discretion to receive maximum dose of 60 mg/kg at a frequency of not exceeding every 2 weeks (Q2W). | 7 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab Participants who received nipocalimab in MOM-M281-004 study rolled-over and received IV infusion of nipocalimab 30 mg/kg Q4W starting Day 1 up to 8 weeks. After 8 weeks of treatment on a stable dose of nipocalimab, the dose and/or dosing frequency could be individually adjusted, at the investigator's discretion to receive maximum dose of 60 mg/kg at a frequency of not exceeding Q2W. | 30 |
| Total | 37 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Adverse Event | 0 | 1 |
| Overall Study | COVID-19 | 7 | 29 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Placebo-Nipocalimab | Total | Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 2 Participants | 12 Participants | 10 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 5 Participants | 25 Participants | 20 Participants |
| Age, Continuous | 53.7 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 20.39 | 53.2 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.33 | 53 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.93 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 2 Participants | 4 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 5 Participants | 33 Participants | 28 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Asian | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Black or African American | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized More than one race | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Other | 2 Participants | 2 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized White | 5 Participants | 34 Participants | 29 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment GERMANY | 1 Participants | 2 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment ITALY | 0 Participants | 2 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment POLAND | 0 Participants | 7 Participants | 7 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment SPAIN | 4 Participants | 11 Participants | 7 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment UNITED STATES | 2 Participants | 15 Participants | 13 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 4 Participants | 22 Participants | 18 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 3 Participants | 15 Participants | 12 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 7 | 1 / 30 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 4 / 7 | 17 / 30 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 1 / 7 | 4 / 30 |
Outcome results
Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase
Change from baseline in chemistry laboratory parameters alanine aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), creatine kinase, gamma glutamyl transferase, lactate dehydrogenase were reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific categories. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | ALT | 17.0 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 28.76 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Alkaline Phosphatase | 6.3 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 2.06 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | AST | 23.5 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 47.67 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Creatine Kinase | -17.8 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 33.13 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Gamma Glutamyl Transferase | 4.3 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 11.95 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Lactate Dehydrogenase | 30.0 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 15.68 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Lactate Dehydrogenase | 30.9 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 58.1 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | ALT | 2.6 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 5.33 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Creatine Kinase | 13.6 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 38.34 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Gamma Glutamyl Transferase | 1.5 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 13.21 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Alkaline Phosphatase | 5.2 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 11.46 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | AST | 0.9 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 3.42 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Alkaline Phosphatase | 5.4 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 10.23 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | AST | 5.2 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 20.8 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Lactate Dehydrogenase | 30.7 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 52 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Creatine Kinase | 7.7 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 38.73 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | ALT | 5.3 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 13.43 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Alanine Aminotransferase, Alkaline Phosphatase, Aspartate Aminotransferase, Creatine Kinase, Gamma Glutamyl Transferase, Lactate Dehydrogenase | Gamma Glutamyl Transferase | 2.0 units per liter (U/L) | Standard Deviation 12.74 |
Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Albumin and Protein
Change from baseline in chemistry laboratory parameters: albumin and protein were reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this outcome measure (OM). As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Albumin and Protein | Albumin | -1.5 grams per liter (g/L) | Standard Deviation 2.89 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Albumin and Protein | Protein | -3.5 grams per liter (g/L) | Standard Deviation 2.08 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Albumin and Protein | Albumin | -1.2 grams per liter (g/L) | Standard Deviation 3.21 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Albumin and Protein | Protein | -3.8 grams per liter (g/L) | Standard Deviation 4.99 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Albumin and Protein | Albumin | -1.3 grams per liter (g/L) | Standard Deviation 3.08 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Albumin and Protein | Protein | -3.7 grams per liter (g/L) | Standard Deviation 4.54 |
Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen
Change from baseline in chemistry laboratory parameters: bicarbonate, calcium, chloride, cholesterol, glucose, phosphate, potassium, sodium, triglycerides, urate and urea nitrogen were reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Sodium | 0.8 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.96 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Glucose | 0.280 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.5054 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Urate | -0.0090 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.04285 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Potassium | 0.05 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.173 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Phosphate | -0.018 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.0971 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Bicarbonate | -2.0 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 2.45 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Chloride | 0.5 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 1.91 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Calcium | 0.010 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.0627 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Triglycerides | 0.223 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.5799 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Cholesterol | 0.480 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 1.01 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Urea Nitrogen | -0.270 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 1.783 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Phosphate | -0.002 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.1903 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Bicarbonate | 1.6 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 2.91 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Calcium | -0.018 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.1005 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Chloride | 0.6 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 2.85 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Cholesterol | 0.261 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.5732 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Glucose | -0.258 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 1.1401 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Potassium | 0.05 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.583 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Sodium | 1.4 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 2.18 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Triglycerides | 0.081 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.3223 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Urate | 0.0174 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.0479 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Urea Nitrogen | -0.105 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 1.7292 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Urate | 0.124 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.04716 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Sodium | 1.2 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 2 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Chloride | 0.6 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 2.66 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Bicarbonate | 1.0 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 3.14 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Triglycerides | 0.108 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.3699 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Calcium | -0.013 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.0938 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Phosphate | -0.005 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.1744 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Glucose | -0.155 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 1.0607 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Urea Nitrogen | -0.136 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 1.6951 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Potassium | 0.05 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.526 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bicarbonate, Calcium, Chloride, Cholesterol, Glucose, Phosphate, Potassium, Sodium, Triglycerides, Urate and Urea Nitrogen | Cholesterol | 0.303 millimoles per liter (mmol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.6509 |
Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin
Change from baseline in chemistry laboratory parameters: bilirubin, creatinine and direct bilirubin were reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific categories. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Creatinine | -9.0 micromoles per liter (micromol/L) | Standard Deviation 7.35 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Bilirubin | 0.13 micromoles per liter (micromol/L) | Standard Deviation 2.616 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Direct Bilirubin | -1.20 micromoles per liter (micromol/L) | — |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Creatinine | -2.6 micromoles per liter (micromol/L) | Standard Deviation 13.2 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Bilirubin | -0.59 micromoles per liter (micromol/L) | Standard Deviation 2.403 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Direct Bilirubin | -0.70 micromoles per liter (micromol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.283 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Bilirubin | -0.46 micromoles per liter (micromol/L) | Standard Deviation 2.393 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Direct Bilirubin | -0.87 micromoles per liter (micromol/L) | Standard Deviation 0.359 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Chemistry Laboratory Parameters: Bilirubin, Creatinine and Direct Bilirubin | Creatinine | -3.9 micromoles per liter (micromol/L) | Standard Deviation 12.41 |
Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Volume
Change from baseline in erythrocytes mean corpuscular volume (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Volume | 2.45 femtoliters (fL) | Standard Deviation 6.174 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Volume | -1.41 femtoliters (fL) | Standard Deviation 3.406 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Volume | -0.64 femtoliters (fL) | Standard Deviation 4.206 |
Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes (Red Blood Cell)
Change from baseline in erythrocytes (red blood cells) (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes (Red Blood Cell) | 0.188 10^12 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.0822 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes (Red Blood Cell) | 0.121 10^12 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.2702 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Erythrocytes (Red Blood Cell) | 0.135 10^12 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.2438 |
Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hematocrit
Change from baseline in hematocrit (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hematocrit | 0.0278 liter of cells per liter of blood (L/L) | Standard Deviation 0.03542 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hematocrit | 0.0048 liter of cells per liter of blood (L/L) | Standard Deviation 0.02401 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hematocrit | 0.0094 liter of cells per liter of blood (L/L) | Standard Deviation 0.02725 |
Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hemoglobin
Change from baseline in hemoglobin (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hemoglobin | 5.8 g/L | Standard Deviation 4.65 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hemoglobin | 0.6 g/L | Standard Deviation 7.29 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameter: Hemoglobin | 1.7 g/L | Standard Deviation 7.06 |
Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes
Change from baseline in hematology laboratory parameters: basophils, eosinophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, platelets and leukocytes were reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific categories. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Eosinophils | 0.015 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.0465 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Neutrophils | -0.433 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.5744 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Monocytes | -0.105 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.1964 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Basophils | -0.003 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.015 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Leukocytes | -0.568 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.9214 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Platelets | 27.8 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 11.81 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Lymphocytes | -0.045 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.4498 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Monocytes | 0.059 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.2008 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Basophils | 0.010 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.02 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Eosinophils | 0.013 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.0776 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Lymphocytes | 0.063 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.4715 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Neutrophils | 0.411 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 1.8622 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Platelets | 12.3 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 53.2 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Leukocytes | 0.567 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 1.9956 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Neutrophils | 0.243 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 1.7058 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Eosinophils | 0.014 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.0702 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Leukocytes | 0.340 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 1.8694 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Platelets | 15.4 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 47.93 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Monocytes | 0.027 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.2061 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Lymphocytes | 0.041 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.4576 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Laboratory Parameters: Basophils, Eosinophils, Lymphocytes, Monocytes, Neutrophils, Platelets and Leukocytes | Basophils | 0.006 10^9 cells count per Liter | Standard Deviation 0.0188 |
Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB)
Change from baseline in erythrocytes mean corpuscular HGB (hematology laboratory parameter) was reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB) | 0.03 picograms (pg) | Standard Deviation 0.873 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB) | -0.61 picograms (pg) | Standard Deviation 0.813 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB) | -0.48 picograms (pg) | Standard Deviation 0.842 |
Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB) Concentration
Change from baseline in erythrocytes mean corpuscular hemoglobin (HGB) concentration (hematology laboratory parameter) were reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB) Concentration | -6.5 grams per Liter (g/L) | Standard Deviation 25.7 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB) Concentration | -2.1 grams per Liter (g/L) | Standard Deviation 7.61 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Hematology Parameter: Erythrocytes Mean Corpuscular Hemoglobin (HGB) Concentration | -3.0 grams per Liter (g/L) | Standard Deviation 12.38 |
Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: pH
Change from baseline in pH (urinalysis laboratory parameter) was reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: pH | -0.8 pH | Standard Deviation 0.96 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: pH | 0.0 pH | Standard Deviation 1.06 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: pH | -0.1 pH | Standard Deviation 1.06 |
Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: Specific Gravity
Change from baseline in specific gravity (urinalysis laboratory parameter) was reported.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: Specific Gravity | -0.0003 ratio | Standard Deviation 0.0066 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: Specific Gravity | -0.0030 ratio | Standard Deviation 0.00973 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Urinalysis Laboratory Parameter: Specific Gravity | -0.0025 ratio | Standard Deviation 0.00914 |
Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations
Number of participants with abnormalities in physical examinations (abdomen, head, ears, eyes, nose, throat, and sinuses, lungs, neurological, skin, blood and lymphatic system, cardiovascular, chest, gastrointestinal, general appearance and musculoskeletal) were reported.
Time frame: Week 12
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this outcome measure (OM). Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific categories. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Neurological | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Lungs | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Abdomen | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Head, Ears, Eyes, Nose, Throat and Sinuses | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Skin | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Lungs | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Abdomen | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Head, Ears, Eyes, Nose, Throat and Sinuses | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Neurological | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Skin | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Skin | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Neurological | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Abdomen | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Lungs | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Abnormalities in Physical Examinations | Head, Ears, Eyes, Nose, Throat and Sinuses | 0 Participants |
Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter
Number of participants with at least one value above upper limit of normal (\>ULN) or below the lower limit of normal (\< LLN) value of coagulation parameters (activated partial thromboplastin time \[APTT\] and prothrombin time \[PT\]) were reported. The lab reference range for APTT is 25.1 to 36.5 seconds. The lab reference range for PT is 9.4 to 12.5 seconds.
Time frame: Up to 257 days post-baseline
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | PT (>ULN) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | APTT (>ULN) | 2 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | PT (<ULN) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | APTT (<LLN) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | PT (>ULN) | 8 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | APTT (<LLN) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | PT (<ULN) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | APTT (>ULN) | 15 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | PT (<ULN) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | APTT (>ULN) | 17 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | APTT (<LLN) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Below/Above Normal Values of Coagulation Laboratory Parameter | PT (>ULN) | 9 Participants |
Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores
Number of participants with C-SSRS scores were reported. C-SSRS is a clinician-administered questionnaire designed to solicit occurrence, severity, and frequency of suicide-related ideation and behaviors. Total score ranges from 1 to 10, score of 0 was assigned (0=no event that can be assessed based on C-SSRS). Higher total scores indicate greater severity. Maximum score assigned for each participant was summarized into one of 3 categories: no suicidal ideation or behavior (0), suicidal ideation (1 to 5): higher score indicates more suicidal ideation, suicidal behavior (6 to 10): higher score indicates more suicidal behavior. Suicidal ideation includes participants who did not have suicidal ideation or behavior at baseline and had suicidal ideation without behavior at some time point post-baseline. Suicidal behavior includes participants who did not have suicidal ideation or behavior at baseline and had suicidal behavior at some time point post-baseline (baseline=Day 1).
Time frame: Up to 257 days post-baseline
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | Suicidal Ideation | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | No Suicidal Ideation/Behavior | 5 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | Suicidal Behavior | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | Suicidal Ideation | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | No Suicidal Ideation/Behavior | 30 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | Suicidal Behavior | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | No Suicidal Ideation/Behavior | 35 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | Suicidal Behavior | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) Scores | Suicidal Ideation | 1 Participants |
Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical event that occurs in a participant administered an investigational product and it does not necessarily indicate only events with clear causal relationship with the relevant investigational product. SAE is defined as any AE occurring at any dose that results in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening AE, hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, a persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect.
Time frame: Up to 257 days post-baseline
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) | 5 Participants |
Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values
Number of participants with treatment-emergent abnormal ECG values for variables including mean heart rate (abnormally low refers to less than or equal to \[\<=\] 50 beats per minute \[bpm\], abnormally high refers greater than or equal to \[\>=\] 120 bpm), PR interval (abnormally low refers to \< 120 and abnormally high refers to \>200 milliseconds \[msec\]), RR interval (abnormally low refers to \<600 msec and abnormally high refers to \>1200 msec) and QRS duration (abnormally \> 120) were reported.
Time frame: Up to 257 days post-baseline
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | ECG Mean Heart Rate (>=120) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | RR Interval (<600) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | PR Interval (> 200) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | ECG Mean Heart Rate (<= 50) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | QRS Duration (>120) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | RR Interval (>=1200) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | PR Interval (<120) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | PR Interval (> 200) | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | ECG Mean Heart Rate (<= 50) | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | ECG Mean Heart Rate (>=120) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | PR Interval (<120) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | RR Interval (<600) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | RR Interval (>=1200) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | QRS Duration (>120) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | RR Interval (<600) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | ECG Mean Heart Rate (>=120) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | QRS Duration (>120) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | RR Interval (>=1200) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | PR Interval (> 200) | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | PR Interval (<120) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Electrocardiograms (ECG) Values | ECG Mean Heart Rate (<= 50) | 5 Participants |
Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs
Number of participants with treatment-emergent abnormal vital signs including pulse rate (less than or equal to \[\<=\] 50 beats per minutes \[bpm\] with greater than or equal to \[\>=\] 15 bpm decrease from baseline, \>= 120 bpm with \>=15 bpm increase from baseline), systolic blood pressure (SBP) (\<= 90 millimeters of mercury \[mmHg\] with \>= 20 mmHg decrease from baseline, \>= 160 mmHg with \>= 20 mmHg increase from baseline) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (\<= 50 mmHg with \>=15 mmHg decrease from baseline, \>=100 mmHg with \>=15 mmHg decrease from baseline) were reported.
Time frame: Up to 257 days post-baseline
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | Pulse rate: <=50 bpm with >=15 bpm decrease from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | Pulse rate: >= 120 bpm with >=15 bpm increase from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | SBP: <= 90 mmHg with >= 20 mmHg decrease from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | SBP: >= 160 mmHg with >= 20 mmHg increase from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | DBP: <= 50 mmHg with >=15 mmHg decrease from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | DBP: >=100 mmHg with >=15 mmHg decrease from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | DBP: >=100 mmHg with >=15 mmHg decrease from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | Pulse rate: <=50 bpm with >=15 bpm decrease from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | SBP: >= 160 mmHg with >= 20 mmHg increase from baseline | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | DBP: <= 50 mmHg with >=15 mmHg decrease from baseline | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | Pulse rate: >= 120 bpm with >=15 bpm increase from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | SBP: <= 90 mmHg with >= 20 mmHg decrease from baseline | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | Pulse rate: >= 120 bpm with >=15 bpm increase from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | SBP: <= 90 mmHg with >= 20 mmHg decrease from baseline | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | DBP: >=100 mmHg with >=15 mmHg decrease from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | SBP: >= 160 mmHg with >= 20 mmHg increase from baseline | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | Pulse rate: <=50 bpm with >=15 bpm decrease from baseline | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Abnormal Vital Signs | DBP: <= 50 mmHg with >=15 mmHg decrease from baseline | 2 Participants |
Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs)
Number of participants with treatment-emergent AESIs were reported. Severe infections and hypoalbuminemia (Grade 3 or higher according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events \[CTCAE\] v5.0) were considered as AESIs.
Time frame: Up to 257 days post-baseline
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) | 2 Participants |
Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)
Number of participants with TEAEs were reported. An adverse event (AE) is any untoward medical event that occurs in a participant administered an investigational product and it does not necessarily indicate only events with clear causal relationship with the relevant investigational product. TEAEs are defined as any AE occurring during or after the initiation of the first infusion of study drug in this study.
Time frame: Up to 257 days post-baseline (Baseline is Day 1)
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) | 18 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) | 22 Participants |
Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time
The CGI-S scale is the clinician/physician's global assessment of participants illness severity of MG and is rated by answering on 8-point scale. Considering total clinical experience, participant is assessed on severity of illness according to: 0=not performed; 1=normal, not at all ill; 2=borderline illness; 3=mildly ill; 4=moderately ill; 5=markedly ill; 6=severely ill; 7=among most extremely ill patients. Higher scores indicated more severity of illness. Values of 0 (not assessed) were excluded from analysis. CGI-S permits global evaluation of participant's condition at given time.
Time frame: Baseline up to Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline)
Population: The FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific timepoints. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 12 | -0.5 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | -1.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.22 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 8 | -1.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.71 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 24 | 0.0 score on a scale | — |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 4 | -0.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.84 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 8 | -0.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.9 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 24 | -0.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.89 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) | -0.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.95 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 4 | -0.3 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.6 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | -0.1 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.73 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 12 | -0.5 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.8 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | -0.3 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.88 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 4 | -0.3 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.63 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 8 | -0.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.86 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 12 | -0.5 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.81 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | Week 24 | -0.5 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.84 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) Rating Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) | -0.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.95 |
Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time
Change from baseline in serum immunoglobulin (Ig)G concentration over time was reported.
Time frame: Baseline to Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, up to 253 days post-baseline, up to 257 days post-baseline
Population: The safety analysis set included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. Here, 'n' included the number of participants evaluated for specific timepoints. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 24 | -3.870 g/L | — |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 8 | -2.996 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.3773 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | 257 days post-baseline | -1.150 g/L | Standard Deviation 0.5687 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 12 | -3.243 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.6378 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 4 | -3.234 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.1858 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 2 | -6.888 g/L | Standard Deviation 0.6104 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | 253 days post-baseline | -3.494 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.9208 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 2 | -5.457 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.251 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 4 | -2.796 g/L | Standard Deviation 0.9728 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 8 | -3.122 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.3466 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 12 | -3.639 g/L | Standard Deviation 2.2627 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 24 | -4.072 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.2826 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | 257 days post-baseline | -0.020 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.6162 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 4 | -2.866 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.0014 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | 257 days post-baseline | -0.289 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.5056 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 24 | -4.038 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.1502 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | 253 days post-baseline | -3.494 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.9208 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 8 | -3.095 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.3235 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 2 | -5.681 g/L | Standard Deviation 1.2804 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Serum Immunoglobulin (Ig)G Concentration Over Time | Week 12 | -3.563 g/L | Standard Deviation 2.1269 |
Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time
The MG-ADL was used to assess the participant's MG symptom severity. It assesses eight functions (talking, chewing, swallowing, breathing, impairment of ability to brush teeth or comb hair, impairment of ability to arise from a chair, double vision, and eyelid droop) which were rated on a 4-point scale: 0 (no impairment) to 3 (severe impairment). The total score is the sum of the eight function scores and ranges from 0 to 24. Higher scores indicated greater symptom severity/difficulty in performing daily living activities.
Time frame: Baseline up to Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline)
Population: The full analysis set (FAS) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific timepoints. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 12 | -0.3 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.35 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | -0.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.14 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 8 | -0.8 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.7 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 24 | -1.0 score on a scale | — |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 4 | 0.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.34 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 8 | -0.9 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.63 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 24 | -1.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.92 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) | -2.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.55 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 4 | -0.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.42 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | 1.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.08 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 12 | -1.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.49 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | 0.9 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.91 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 4 | -0.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.3 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 8 | -0.9 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.8 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 12 | -1.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.82 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | Week 24 | -1.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.72 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Myasthenia Gravis - Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) | -2.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.55 |
Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time
The QMG test was used to assess the participant's strength. The quantitative results of each of the 13 strength components were mapped to a 4-point scale where 0 equals to (=) none, 1= mild, 2= moderate and 3= severe. The total score is the sum of the 13 scale scores and ranges from 0 to 39. Higher scores indicated more severe impairment.
Time frame: Baseline up to Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline)
Population: The FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific timepoints. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 12 | -0.5 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.54 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | -3.0 score on a scale | — |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 8 | -3.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.66 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 4 | 1.5 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.36 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 12 | -1.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.23 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 8 | 1.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.53 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 24 | -2.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.53 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) | -2.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.12 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 4 | -1.3 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.6 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | -1.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.07 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | -1.8 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.98 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 4 | -0.8 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.28 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 8 | 0.1 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.98 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 12 | -1.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.33 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | Week 24 | -2.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.53 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) | -2.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.12 |
Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time
The MG-QoL15r was used to assess the participant's limitations related to living with MG. It consists of 15 questions and each of the 15 questions were rated by the participant on a 3-point scale (0= Not at all, 1= somewhat, 2=very much) based on a recall period of over the past few weeks. The total score is the sum of the 15 question scores and ranges from 0 to 30. Higher scores indicated more limitation.
Time frame: Baseline up to Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline)
Population: The FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific timepoints. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 12 | -1.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.27 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | -1.3 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.72 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 8 | -0.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.97 |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 24 | -3.0 score on a scale | — |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 4 | 1.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.85 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 8 | -1.9 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.34 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 24 | -1.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.52 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) | -3.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.28 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 4 | -2.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.53 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | 0.1 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.11 |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 12 | -3.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.7 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) | -0.2 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.69 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 4 | -1.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.57 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 8 | -1.6 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.23 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 12 | -2.9 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.95 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | Week 24 | -1.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.51 |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Change From Baseline in Total Revised Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life - 15 Scale (MG-QoL15r) Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) | -3.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.28 |
Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time
Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or greater than or equal to (\>=) 8-point improvement in total MG-ADL score over time were reported. MG-ADL was used to assess the participant's MG symptom severity. It assesses eight functions (talking, chewing, swallowing, breathing, impairment of ability to brush teeth or comb hair, impairment of ability to arise from a chair, double vision, and eyelid droop) which were rated on a 4-point scale: 0 (no impairment) to 3 (severe impairment). The total score is the sum of the eight function scores and ranges from 0 to 24. Higher scores indicated greater symptom severity/difficulty in performing daily living activities.
Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline)
Population: The FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific timepoints. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (6 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (6 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (6 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (3 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (3 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (2 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (2 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (2 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (3 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (2 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (3 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (5 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (6 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (2 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (3 Point Improvement) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (6 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (2 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (3 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (6 Point Improvement) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (2 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (3 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (4 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (6 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (2 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (3 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (5 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (6 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (7 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (2 Point Improvement) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (3 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (6 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (3 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (6 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (3 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (6 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (2 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (3 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (5 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (5 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (2 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (3 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (6 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (6 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (5 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (4 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (7 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (6 Point Improvement) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (3 Point Improvement) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (2 Point Improvement) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 8 (2 Point Improvement) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 12 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (>= 8 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (2 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (6 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (3 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (2 Point Improvement) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 24 (4 Point Improvement) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With a 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7-, or Greater Than or Equal to (>=) 8-point Improvement in Total MG-ADL Score Over Time | Week 4 (7 Point Improvement) | 0 Participants |
Number of Participants With Anti-drug Antibodies (ADA) to Nipocalimab
Number of participants with ADA to nipocalimab were reported. The presence of ADA to nipocalimab in serum was determined by a sensitive and drug-tolerant electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) method.
Time frame: Up to 257 days post-baseline
Population: The FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Anti-drug Antibodies (ADA) to Nipocalimab | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Anti-drug Antibodies (ADA) to Nipocalimab | 16 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Anti-drug Antibodies (ADA) to Nipocalimab | 17 Participants |
Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time
Number of participants with change from baseline in MGFA classification score over time were reported. The MGFA was used to assess the participant's MG severity. MGFA classification identifies the subgroup participants with MG who share distinct clinical features or severity of disease: Class I (ocular MG), classes II, III and IV generalized MG with mild, moderate and severe disease, respectively; Class V MG crisis. Separate subclasses under classes II, III and IV are designed: a if the predominant weakness is affecting limb/axial weakness or both; subclass b if the predominant weakness is affecting oropharyngeal or respiratory muscles or both. In the MGFA classification, lower roman numerals mean less severity. Changes in MGFA classification (regardless of subclass) are categorized as Improved (example, III to II), Same (example, II to II), or Worsened (example, II to III).
Time frame: Weeks 8, 24 and End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline)
Population: The FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific timepoints. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 8 (Improved) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 8 (Same) | 3 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 8 (Worsened) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 24 (Improved) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 24 (Same) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 24 (Worsened) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 8 (Worsened) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 24 (Worsened) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Worsened) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Improved) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 8 (Improved) | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 24 (Same) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 24 (Improved) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 8 (Same) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Same) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 8 (Same) | 6 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 8 (Worsened) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Same) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 24 (Improved) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 24 (Same) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Worsened) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 24 (Worsened) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | Week 8 (Improved) | 6 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Change From Baseline in Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Classification Score Over Time | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Improved) | 4 Participants |
Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score
Number of participants with improvement of illness based on CGI-I scale score over time were reported. The CGI-I scale is the clinician/physician's global assessment of the change in severity of the patient's generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG) since starting this study. The rating is given on a 7-point scale with lower scores indicating greater improvement (1= Very much improved; 2 = Much improved; 3 = Minimally improved; 4 = No change; 5 =Minimally worse; 6 = Much worse; 7 = Very much worse. Values of 0 (not assessed) were excluded from analysis. Higher score indicates more severity.
Time frame: Weeks 4, 8, 12, 24, End of Treatment (EoT) (up to 253 days post-baseline), Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline)
Population: The FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were evaluated for this OM. Here, 'n' (number analyzed) specifies the number of participants evaluated for specific timepoints. As per planned analysis, data is reported for individual arms and for all (total) participants both.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (No change) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Much improved) | 2 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Much improved) | 3 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Minimally worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Minimally worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Very much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Much improved) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Very Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Minimally worse) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Very much improved) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Minimally worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Much worse) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (No change) | 2 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Minimally improved) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Very Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Very much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Minimally improved) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Very much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (No change) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Very Much improved) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Minimally worse) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Much improved) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (No change) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (No change) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Minimally improved) | 0 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Minimally improved) | 2 Participants |
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Minimally improved) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (No change) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Very much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Minimally worse) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (No change) | 7 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Minimally improved) | 12 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Much improved) | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Very much improved) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Very much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Minimally worse) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (No change) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Minimally improved) | 6 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Much improved) | 8 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Very much improved) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Very much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Minimally worse) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (No change) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Minimally improved) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Much improved) | 10 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Very Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Minimally worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (No change) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Minimally improved) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Much improved) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Very Much improved) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Very Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (Minimally worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Minimally improved) | 7 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Much improved) | 7 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Very Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Much worse) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Minimally worse) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (No change) | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Minimally improved) | 8 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Much improved) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Minimally improved) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Minimally worse) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Minimally improved) | 14 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Much improved) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Very much improved) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Very Much improved) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Minimally worse) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Very Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (No change) | 8 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Much improved) | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (Minimally worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Very much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline) (No change) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (No change) | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Minimally improved) | 7 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Minimally worse) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Much improved) | 7 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (No change) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Very much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Minimally improved) | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Minimally worse) | 2 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | EoT (up to 253 days post-baseline)(Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Much improved) | 11 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 12 (Very much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Minimally improved) | 8 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Very Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Very much improved) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Very Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Much improved) | 10 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Much improved) | 5 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (Minimally worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (Minimally improved) | 8 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 4 (Much worse) | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 24 (No change) | 1 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Week 8 (No change) | 3 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Improvement of Illness Over Time Based on Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score | Follow-up (up to 257 days post-baseline) (Much worse) | 3 Participants |
Number of Participants With Neutralizing Antibodies (NAbs) to Nipocalimab
Number of participants with NAbs were reported. Neutralizing antibodies to nipocalimab were assessed using a non-cell based competitive ligand binding ECLIA assay.
Time frame: Up to 257 days post-baseline
Population: FAS included all participants who received at least 1 dose of study drug nipocalimab. Here, 'N' (number of participants analyzed) specifies all participants who were positive for antibodies to nipocalimab. Per planned analysis, both individual arms and an arm for all (total) participants is presented.
| Arm | Measure | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Neutralizing Antibodies (NAbs) to Nipocalimab | 0 Participants |
| Nipocalimab-Nipocalimab | Number of Participants With Neutralizing Antibodies (NAbs) to Nipocalimab | 4 Participants |
| Nipocalimab (All Participants) | Number of Participants With Neutralizing Antibodies (NAbs) to Nipocalimab | 4 Participants |