Trial reportJournal of neurology2026
Long-term safety and efficacy of ponesimod in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis: results from the phase 3 OPTIMUM 5-year long term extension study.
Trial report in Journal of neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn phase 3 OPTIMUM study, ponesimod demonstrated superior efficacy and acceptable safety vs teriflunomide in participants with relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). This long-term extension (LTE) study was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of ponesimod 20 mg (P20 mg) during extended treatment.
methodsParticipants who completed core OPTIMUM study entered OPTIMUM-LTE; Participants receiving P20 mg once daily (OD) in core continued with the same dose (P20 mg/P20 mg) and those receiving teriflunomide 14 mg OD switched to P20 mg (T14 mg/P20 mg) in the LTE study. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE). Efficacy was assessed using annualized relapse rate (ARR), time to first confirmed relapse up to end of study (EOS), confirmed disability accumulation (CDA), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based endpoints.
resultsOf 1133 participants from core study, 877 were enrolled in 240-week LTE study (ponesimod: 439; teriflunomide:438). During LTE, 93.6% of participants in both groups experienced ≥ 1 TEAE; overall, serious TEAEs were experienced by 12.9% of participants (P20 mg/P20 mg: 12.8%; T14 mg/P20 mg: 13.0%) and TEAEs leading to study treatment discontinuation were experienced by 8.6% of participants (P20 mg/P20 mg: 7.7%; T14 mg/P20 mg: 9.4). In combined analysis period, mean ARR was 0.143 (95% CL: 0.123-0.167) for P20 mg/P20 mg and 0.184 (95% CL: 0.158-0.213) for T14 mg/P20 mg; 44.3% of participants in P20 mg/P20 mg and 49.5% in T14 mg/P20 mg experienced relapse. Overall, more participants in P20 mg/P20 mg vs T14 mg/P20 mg group achieved no evidence of disease activity (NEDA)-3 at end of LTE (17.5% vs 7.5%).
conclusionsPonesimod demonstrated extended safety and sustained efficacy over 5 years in participants with RMS, without new safety signals. Results suggest that the effects on the MS disease control are maintained with ponesimod over the LTE treatment period.
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.