RENEWED: A follow-up study of the opicinumab phase 2 RENEW study in participants with acute optic neuritis

Background: The randomized, phase 2 RENEW trial (NCT01721161) evaluated efficacy/safety of opicinumab (anti-LINGO-1) versus placebo in patients with first-episode unilateral acute optic neuritis (AON). Although no significant differences in the latency recovery of visual evoked potential (VEP) were observed between opicinumab and placebo groups in the intention to treat (ITT) population, the prespecified per-protocol (PP) population showed better recovery with opicinumab than with placebo. RENEWED (NCT02657915) was a one-visit, follow-up study 2 years after the last RENEW study visit (Week 32) designed to assess the long-term electrophysiological and clinical outcomes for participants previously enrolled and having received study treatment in RENEW.

Methods: In the original study (RENEW), participants (aged 18-55 years) with a first unilateral AON episode were enrolled ≤28 days from first symptom onset and after treatment with methylprednisolone 1 g/day intravenously for 3-5 days; these participants were randomized to receive opicinumab 100 mg/kg or placebo intravenously once every 4 weeks from baseline to Week 20, assessed up to Week 32. Participants who received ≥1 dose of opicinumab 100 mg/kg or placebo in RENEW were eligible for the RENEWED follow-up study. Participants enrolled in RENEWED at 2 years (with an additional up to 12-month window) after the last RENEW study visit (Week 32) in both ITT and PP populations. The primary endpoint was change in full-field VEP (FF-VEP) latency of the affected eye at RENEWED study visit versus baseline of the fellow eye in RENEW, comparing between participants who received opicinumab and placebo in RENEW. Clinical progression and severity of multiple sclerosis (MS) were assessed. A substudy evaluated latency recovery using multifocal VEP (mfVEP) as an exploratory endpoint.

Results: Of 82 RENEW participants, 52 (63.4 %; opicinumab n = 28, placebo n = 24) enrolled in and completed RENEWED. The adjusted mean (95 % CI) difference in FF-VEP latency delay between opicinumab and placebo groups was -6.0 (-14.6, 2.6) msec (p = 0.165) for the PP population and -4.5 (-12.6, 3.7) msec (p = 0.274) for the ITT population at the RENEWED study visit. Nominally significant improvement on mfVEP latency in the opicinumab group versus placebo was observed in participants of the mfVEP substudy (p = 0.009). In participants from the PP population without clinically definite MS (CDMS) at RENEW baseline,12 (55 %) in the opicinumab group and 12 (67 %) in the placebo group developed CDMS from enrollment in the RENEW study up to RENEWED Day 1; the estimated proportion of participants with CDMS at 2 years after the last study visit assessment in RENEW was lower when treated with opicinumab (0.50) than when treated with placebo (0.61) (hazard ratio p-value = 0.23). No benefit on visual acuity or other neurological functions was observed in the opicinumab group vs placebo in RENEWED.

Conclusion: The numerically increased VEP latency recovery with opicinumab treatment in RENEWED was consistent with those observed in the parent study RENEW. However, the VEP latency and clinical data in RENEWED should be interpreted with caution, given the nature of the follow-up study, the small sample size and the limitation in study design.