While the results of evolutionRMS, comparing evobrutinib with teriflunomide, were negative, that "doesn't mean that evobrutinib is not working," said Xavier Montalban, MD, PhD, director of the Multiple Sclerosis Center of Catalonia (Cemcat).
Xavier Montalban, MD, PhD, director of the Multiple Sclerosis Center of Catalonia (Cemcat), discussed the designs and findings of the phase 3 evolutionRMS (relapsing multiple sclerosis) 1 and 2 trials, which he presented during the "Late-Breaking Research & Clinical Trials" session at Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ACTRIMS) Forum 2024 on March 2.
Also, although the study population consisted of patients from 52 different countries, Montalban explained that there were no variations in treatment responses.
Transcript
Can you explain the design of the phase 3 evolutionRMS 1 and 2 trials?
They are 2 identical phase 3 trials that were blind. We used them to compare teriflunomide against evobrutinib. More than 1200 patients were recruited in each of the trials. It was a large, large trial, and the duration was about 156 weeks.
Could you please summarize the findings of these trials?
The trial was essentially negative. Evobrutinib didn't show any positive results in relation to teriflunomide for annualized relapse rate, which was the primary end point, or any of the secondary end points, such as confirmed disability progression, confirmed disability improvement, or MRI [magnetic resonance imaging] parameters.
This doesn't mean that evobrutinib is not working. It does work as well as teriflunomide, but we have to say that the trial is definitely negative.
Considering the study population consisted of patients across 52 countries, were there variations in treatment responses or safety outcomes based on geographic regions or demographic factors?
Remember that we had 2 big events during the trial. One was the pandemic and the other was the Ukraine-Russia conflict. In the end, quite a large proportion of patients came from eastern Europe, especially from Ukraine and Russia, but the Merck team managed the situation very well. When you compare patients coming from those areas to patients coming from other areas in the world, there are no differences at all. I think there is no influence at all on the final result of the trials.
Frameworks for Advancing Health Equity: Urban Health Outreach
May 9th 2024In the series debut episode of "Frameworks for Advancing Health Equity," Mary Sligh, CRNP, and Chelsea Chappars, of Allegheny Health Network, explain how the Urban Health Outreach program aims to improve health equity for individuals experiencing homelessness.
Listen
Tackling Health Inequality: The Power of Education and Experience
April 30th 2024To help celebrate and recognize National Minority Health Month, we are bringing you a special month-long podcast series with our Strategic Alliance Partner, UPMC Health Plan. Welcome to our final episode of this limited series and our conversation with Janine Jelks-Seale, MSPPM, director of health equity at UPMC Health Plan.
Listen
Persistence Pays Off With Zanubrutinib: A Challenging CLL Case With a Prior BTK Inhibitor Failure
May 10th 2024The case of a 77-year-old woman with a long chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) history illustrates the novel use of zanubrutinib as a potential option for some patients who have failed first-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors and venetoclax.
Read More