Trial reportAnnals of neurology2025
Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multiple-Dose Studies to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Elezanumab when Added to Standard of Care in Relapsing and Progressive Forms of Multiple Sclerosis.
Trial report in Annals of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeting progressive multiple sclerosis: Toward mechanism-informed precision medicine.Journal of internal medicine · 2026Review
- Repulsive guidance molecule-a regulates neutrophil-associated Th17 responses in CNS autoimmunity.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Repulsive Guidance Molecule-A as a Therapeutic Target Across Neurological Disorders: An Update.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveElezanumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds repulsive guidance molecule a (RGMa), an inhibitor of central nervous system regeneration after inflammation or injury. The aim was to assess the safety and efficacy of elezanumab in relapsing and progressive forms of multiple sclerosis (MS).
methodsRADIUS-R and RADIUS-P were phase 2 trials in relapsing (RADIUS-R) or progressive (RADIUS-P) MS. Participants were randomized to intravenous elezanumab 400mg, 1800mg, or placebo every 4 weeks through week 48. The primary endpoint was the mean Overall Response Score (ORS).
resultsIn RADIUS-R, 208 participants received elezanumab 400mg (n = 69), elezanumab 1800mg (n = 69), or placebo (n = 70). In RADIUS-P, 123 participants received elezanumab 400mg (n = 40), elezanumab 1800mg (n = 40), or placebo (n = 43). The primary endpoint of ORS was not met in either study. For RADIUS-R, mean ORS was -0.2 with effect size of -0.2 for elezanumab 400mg and -0.2 with effect size of -0.2 for elezanumab 1800mg. For RADIUS-P, mean ORS was 0.0 with effect size of 0.0 for elezanumab 400mg and 0.1 with effect size of 0.1 for elezanumab 1800mg. Elezanumab was well tolerated; the rate of serious adverse events was similar across treatment groups in both studies. Adverse events with ≥10% of elezanumab population were falls, urinary tract infections, headaches in RADIUS-R and RADIUS-P, and also fatigue, infusion-related reactions, and muscular weakness in RADIUS-P.
interpretationElezanumab was safe and well tolerated, but did not meet the primary endpoint in either study. ANN NEUROL 2025;98:590-602.
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.