ArticleTherapeutic advances in neurological disorders2024
Maintenance of zilucoplan efficacy in patients with generalised myasthenia gravis up to 24 weeks: a model-informed analysis.
Article in Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Phase 2, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Preliminary Efficacy of RA101495 in Subjects With Generalized Myasthenia Gravis
A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Confirm the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Zilucoplan in Subjects With Generalized Myasthenia Gravis
A Phase 3, Multicenter, Open-Label Extension Study of Zilucoplan in Subjects With Generalized Myasthenia Gravis
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Meta-Analysis Into a Specific Study (InMASS) for Estimating the Target-Population Average Treatment Effect.Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift · 2026Article
- The evolving landscape of complement therapeutics in rheumatology.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical efficacy of zilucoplan has been demonstrated in a 12-week, placebo-controlled, phase III study in patients with acetylcholine receptor autoantibody-positive generalised myasthenia gravis (gMG). However, placebo-controlled zilucoplan data past 12 weeks are not available. Objectives: Predict the treatment effect of zilucoplan versus control (placebo or standard of care) in patients with gMG up to 24 weeks. Design: A model-informed analysis (MIA) within a Bayesian framework. Methods: Part 1 of the MIA comprised a control meta-regression using aggregate data on control response over time from randomised studies and a national myasthenia gravis (MG) registry. In Part 2, a combined Bayesian analysis of individual patient-level data from the phase II (NCT03315130), RAISE (NCT04115293) and RAISE-XT (NCT04225871) studies of zilucoplan was conducted using posterior distributions from Part 1 as informative priors. Population mean treatment effect in the change from baseline (CFB) at week 24 in MG-Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) and quantitative MG (QMG) scores for zilucoplan versus control were assessed. Results: At week 24, the predicted mean CFB in MG-ADL score was -4.55 (95% credible interval: -6.04, -3.13) with zilucoplan versus -2.00 (-3.35, -0.64) with control (difference: -2.55 [-3.76, -1.40]). The probability of a favourable treatment effect as measured by MG-ADL score at week 24 with zilucoplan versus control was >99.9%. There was an 82.8% probability that the difference in the predicted mean CFB in MG-ADL score at week 24 was greater than the clinically meaningful threshold (⩾2.0-point improvement). Comparable results were observed with QMG. Conclusion: This MIA demonstrates the maintenance of efficacy with zilucoplan versus control up to 24 weeks. Through combining real-world evidence with data from randomised studies, this novel method to estimate long-term treatment efficacy facilitated reduced exposure to placebo in the phase III RAISE study. This methodology could be used to reduce the length of future placebo-controlled studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.