Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT03167255

Extension Study of NS-065/NCNP-01 in Boys With Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD)

This is an open-label, extension study of NS-065/NCNP-01 administered intravenously once weekly for an additional 192 weeks to boys with DMD who complete Study NS-065/NCNP-01-201.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Congenital, Hereditary, and Neonatal Diseases and Abnormalities Genetic Diseases, Inborn Genetic Diseases, X-Linked Muscular Diseases Muscular Disorders, Atrophic Muscular Dystrophies Muscular Dystrophy, Duchenne Musculoskeletal Diseases Nervous System Diseases Neuromuscular Diseases

Age range

4 year–10 year

Sex eligibility

Male

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 2

Primary location

Alberta Children's Hospital, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Loading trial locations.

About this study

This is a Phase II, multicenter, open-label, extension study of NS-065/NCNP-01 administered intravenously once weekly for an additional 192 weeks to boys with DMD who complete Study NS-065/NCNP-01-201. This study will evaluate the safety, tolerability, and clinical efficacy of NS-065/NCNP-01 at dose levels of up to 80 mg/kg/week administered by weekly IV infusion over an additional treatment period of 192 weeks or until enrollment in a separate long-term follow up program of NS-065/NCNP-01, whichever is earlier.

Patients who complete the Phase II Dose-finding Study NS-065/NCNP-01-201 are eligible to enroll.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Completed Study NS-065/NCNP-01-201 through Week 25.
  • Willing and able to comply with scheduled visits, investigational product administration plan, and study procedures.
  • Stable dose of glucocorticoid (GC), and is expected to remain on the stable dose for the duration of the study.

Exclusion criteria

  • Serious or severe adverse event in Study NS-065/NCNP-01-201 that precludes safe use of NS-065/NCNP-01.
  • Patient had a treatment which was made for the purpose of dystrophin or its related protein induction after completion of Study NS-065/NCNP-01-201.
  • Patient took any other investigational drugs after completion of Study NS-065/NCNP-01-201.
  • Patient was judged by the investigator and/or the Sponsor that it was not appropriate to participate in the extension study for other reasons.

Treatment and study plan

NS-065/NCNP-01

Drug

Received during weekly intravenous infusions

Primary outcomes

  1. Change From Baseline in Time to Stand (TTSTAND) Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A primary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Time to Stand (TTSTAND)

  2. Change From Baseline in Time to Stand (TTSTAND) Velocity Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A primary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Time to Stand (TTSTAND) Velocity

  3. Number of Participants With Treatment Related Adverse Events as Assessed by CTCAE v4.0.

    Time frame: Up to 192 weeks of treatment

    For adverse events (AEs) starting in study 201 (NCT02740972) which are not resolved at the time of enrollment into this study 202, any change in outcome or relatedness were reported in study 201.

    For AEs starting in study 201 which increase in severity or becomes serious after enrollment in this study 202, a new AE was reported in this study.

    Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were summarized by dose level. Coding was done by system organ class and preferred term (using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA)). Level of severity was assessed using the CTCAE grading system.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change From Baseline in Time to Run/Walk 10 Meters Test (TTRW) Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Time to Run/Walk 10 meters test (TTRW)

  2. Change From Baseline in Time to Run/Walk 10 Meters Test (TTRW) Velocity Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Time to Run/Walk 10 meters test (TTRW) Velocity.

    The results were converted into velocity (meter/time).

  3. Change From Baseline in Time to Climb 4 Stairs (TTCLIMB) Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Time to Climb 4 stairs (TTCLIMB)

  4. Change From Baseline in Time to Climb 4 Stairs (TTCLIMB) Velocity Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Time to Climb 4 stairs (TTCLIMB) Velocity. The results were converted into velocity (meter/time).

  5. Change From Baseline in North Star Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA) Score Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): North Star Ambulatory Assessment (NSAA) score

    The NSAA is a functional scale devised for use in ambulant children with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD).

    It consists of 17 activities graded 0 (unable to perform), 1 (performs with modifications), 2 (normal movement). It assesses abilities necessary to remain ambulant that have been found to progressively deteriorate in untreated DMD patients, as well as in other muscular dystrophies such as Becker Muscular Dystrophy. NSAA Total Score ranges from 0 to 34, with a score of 34 implying normal function.

  6. Change From Baseline in Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT)

  7. Change From Baseline in Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Handgrip Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Handgrip For QMT tests, the higher of each of the bilateral scores recorded for each muscle group at each visit were analyzed. QMT tests were analyzed by dominant/non-dominant side.

    QMT is a well-established method for measuring muscle weakness in neuromuscular disease. Patients will be placed on an examination table with a back-support system to eliminate the need for manual back stabilization. Following a single practice administration, each patient will complete a scored QMT evaluation (perform 2 tests; with the higher of the 2 values used for data analysis). QMT will be performed by recording force in pounds through a direct computer interface with a strain gauge.

  8. Change From Baseline in Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Elbow Flexors Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Elbow Flexors For QMT tests, the higher of each of the bilateral scores recorded for each muscle group at each visit were analyzed. QMT tests were analyzed by dominant/non-dominant side.

    QMT is a well-established method for measuring muscle weakness in neuromuscular disease. Patients will be placed on an examination table with a back-support system to eliminate the need for manual back stabilization. Following a single practice administration, each patient will complete a scored QMT evaluation (perform 2 tests; with the higher of the 2 values used for data analysis). QMT will be performed by recording force in pounds through a direct computer interface with a strain gauge.

  9. Change From Baseline in Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Elbow Extensors Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Elbow Extensors For QMT tests, the higher of each of the bilateral scores recorded for each muscle group at each visit were analyzed. QMT tests were analyzed by dominant/non-dominant side.

    QMT is a well-established method for measuring muscle weakness in neuromuscular disease. Patients will be placed on an examination table with a back-support system to eliminate the need for manual back stabilization. Following a single practice administration, each patient will complete a scored QMT evaluation (perform 2 tests; with the higher of the 2 values used for data analysis). QMT will be performed by recording force in pounds through a direct computer interface with a strain gauge.

  10. Change From Baseline in Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Knee Flexors Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Knee Flexors For QMT tests, the higher of each of the bilateral scores recorded for each muscle group at each visit were analyzed. QMT tests were analyzed by dominant/non-dominant side.

    QMT is a well-established method for measuring muscle weakness in neuromuscular disease. Patients will be placed on an examination table with a back-support system to eliminate the need for manual back stabilization. Following a single practice administration, each patient will complete a scored QMT evaluation (perform 2 tests; with the higher of the 2 values used for data analysis). QMT will be performed by recording force in pounds through a direct computer interface with a strain gauge.

  11. Change From Baseline in Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Knee Extensors Versus Matched Historical Controls

    Time frame: Baseline 201, Weeks 37, 49, 73, 109, 157, 205 in Study 202

    A secondary efficacy endpoint was compared to Baseline of Study 201 (NCT02740972): Quantitative Muscle Testing (QMT) for Knee Extensors For QMT tests, the higher of each of the bilateral scores recorded for each muscle group at each visit were analyzed. QMT tests were analyzed by dominant/non-dominant side.

    QMT is a well-established method for measuring muscle weakness in neuromuscular disease. Patients will be placed on an examination table with a back-support system to eliminate the need for manual back stabilization. Following a single practice administration, each patient will complete a scored QMT evaluation (perform 2 tests; with the higher of the 2 values used for data analysis). QMT will be performed by recording force in pounds through a direct computer interface with a strain gauge.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

NS Pharma, Inc.

Industry

Collaborators

  • Cooperative International Neuromuscular Research Group
  • Nippon Shinyaku Co., Ltd.
  • Therapeutic Research in Neuromuscular Disorders Solutions

Registry information

Official study title

A Phase II, Open-Label, Extension Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of NS-065/NCNP-01 in Boys With Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD)

Important dates

Study start
2017
Primary completion
2021
Study completion
2021
First posted
May 25, 2017
Registry last updated
Dec 28, 2022

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.