Post-hoc analysis of MCI186-17, the extension study to MCI186-16, the confiratory double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study of edaravone in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

In the 24-week double-blind study of edaravone in ALS (MCI186-16), edaravone did not show a statistically significant difference versus placebo for the primary efficacy endpoint. For post-hoc analyses, two subpopulations were identified in which edaravone might be expected to show efficacy: the efficacy-expected subpopulation (EESP), defined by scores of >= 2 points on all 12 items of the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) and a percent predicted forced vital capacity (%FVC) >= 80%, at baseline; and the definite/probable EESP 2 years (dpEESI'2y) subpopulation which, in addition to EESP criteria, had definite or probable ALS diagnosed by El Escorial revised criteria, and disease duration of <= 2 years. In the 36-week extension study of MCI186-16, a 24-week double-blind comparison followed by 12 weeks of open-label edaravone (MCI186-17; NCT00424463), analyses of ALSFRS-R scores of the edaravone-edaravone group and edaravone-placebo group for the full analysis set (FAS) and EESP, as prospectively defined, were reported in a previous article. Here we additionally report results in patients who met dpEESP2y criteria at the baseline of MCI186-16. In the dpEESP2y, the difference in ALSFRS-R changes from 24 to 48 weeks between the edaravone-edaravone and edaravoneplacebo groups was 2.79 (p-0.0719). which was greater than the differences previously reported for the EESP and the FAS. The pattern of adverse events in the dpEESP2y did not show any additional safety findings to those from the earlier prospective study. In conclusion, this post-hoc analysis suggests a potential effect of edaravone between 24 and 48 weeks in patients meeting dpEESI'2y criteria at baseline.