Phase 3b Extension Study <scp>MT</scp> ‐1186‐ <scp>A04</scp> to Evaluate the Continued Efficacy and Safety of Edaravone Oral Suspension for Up to an Additional 48 Weeks in Patients With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/AIMS: An On/Off dosing regimen of intravenous (IV) edaravone and edaravone oral suspension is currently approved in the US for treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Placebo-controlled clinical trials showed that IV edaravone slows physical functional decline. Study MT-1186-A04 continued to examine the efficacy and safety of investigational once daily and approved on/off dosing of edaravone oral suspension in patients with ALS. METHODS: Study MT-1186-A04 (NCT05151471) was a phase 3b, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group extension study for up to an additional 48 weeks following 48-week Study MT-1186-A02 that randomized patients to investigational once daily or approved 105-mg on/off dosing of edaravone oral suspension. Patients who met Study MT-1186-A04 eligibility criteria, including Study MT-1186-A02 completion, continued in the same treatment regimen as Study MT-1186-A02. The primary efficacy endpoint for MT-1186-A04 was time from randomization in Study MT-1186-A02 to a ≥ 12-point decrease in ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) or death, whichever happened first. RESULTS: Over 96 weeks, including Study MT-1186-A02, daily dosing did not show a statistically significant difference vs. approved on/off dosing for the primary endpoint (p = 0.78). Edaravone oral suspension was well tolerated, and no new safety concerns were identified in either group. DISCUSSION: Similar to Study MT-1186-A02, once daily edaravone oral suspension in extension Study MT-1186-A04 did not show superiority in terms of the primary efficacy endpoint, but had equivalent efficacy, safety, and tolerability, compared with the approved On/Off regimen. The results reinforce the appropriateness of the approved dosing regimen.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".