Trial reportMuscle & nerve2026
Generalizability of Edaravone Efficacy.
Trial report in Muscle & nerve, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Generalizability of Edaravone Efficacy.Muscle & nerve · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The pivotal phase 3 trial MCI186-19 (Study 19) demonstrated the efficacy of intravenous edaravone in slowing functional decline in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), leading to United States Food and Drug Administration approval. Study 19 utilized a targeted enrollment enrichment strategy based on post hoc analyses from earlier trials, selecting patients with higher baseline function, more rapid disease progression, and better respiratory status. To evaluate the generalizability of Study 19 results, subsequent post hoc analyses assessed the efficacy of edaravone in broader ALS populations. One machine learning-based analysis retrospectively applied a validated model to Study 16 data, stratifying patients by predicted risk of respiratory decline. This detectable effect cluster analysis suggested that up to 70% of Study 16 participants may have benefited from edaravone. A second analysis investigated edaravone efficacy in patients from Study 19 with forced vital capacity (FVC) < 80% predicted (%p) at the start of treatment, since FVC ≥ 80%p was one of the Study 19 inclusion criteria. Both high- and low-FVC subgroups demonstrated reduced ALS functional rating scale-revised decline at 48 weeks when treated continuously with edaravone. These findings support the potential benefit of edaravone in a wider range of patients with ALS than those enrolled in Study 19, providing important insights into how clinical trial enrichment strategies may influence perceived efficacy, and underscoring the need for future prospective studies in more diverse ALS populations.
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.