throbber
up‘Avcisauaam-.
`
`Dn EI
`
`-
`to
`
`POGJ41
`Randomized, Prospective, I-later-Blinded. Four
`Year Pllot Study To compare the Eflect of Daily
`Venue Every other Day Olatlramer Acetate 20
`mg Sllscutanoous lnjectlons In anus Christina Caan,
`Detroit, MI, Alexandros Tselis. Rochester Hills, MI, Wendy Ching,
`Moeein Din, [mad Zak, Zahid Latifl Fen Baa, Samia Ragheb,
`Alan Hudson, Omar Khan, Detroit, MI
`OBJECTIVE: We conducted a pilot trial to compare the efiect of GA 20 mg
`SC daily to every other day (QOD) on clinical, MR1, and immunologic
`outcomes in RRMS. BACKGROUND: The recommended dose of gluti-
`ramer acetate (GA) for the treatment of RRMS is 20 mg SC daily though
`the optimal dose remains unknown. Recent studies failed to show improved
`eflicacy with higher than the recommended dose. DESIGN/METHODS:
`Treatment naive RRMS patients were randomized to GA 20 mg SC QD or
`QOD and followed prospectively for 2 years. Afler 2 years, patients in each
`group were given the option to continue or switch to the other group, and
`followed for an additional 2 years. EDSS was recorded every 6 months by a
`masked-rater. Brain MRI scans were obtained at baseline. years 2 and 4.
`Blood for immunologic testing was obtained at baseline and multiple time
`points afiaer randomization. RESULTS: 30 patients were randomized to GA
`20 mg SC given QD or QOD. Both groups were matched for age, disease
`duration, EDSS, relapse rate. and T2“! lesions. After 2 years, there were no
`diflerence in the relapse rate, disease progression, or any MR1 outcome. In
`vitro GA-proliferativs responses and ’l‘h1fl‘h2 cytokine expression did not
`difl'er between the two groups at any time point am: randomization. After
`2 years. all patients in the QD group opted to switch to QOD. After a total
`of 4 years of prospective follow-up, there was no difference in the clinical
`eficacy between the “QD-QOD cross over’ and the ‘always QOD” groups.
`Injection related lipostrophy was significantly less in the QOD group.
`CONCLUSIONSIRELEVANCE: This pilot study suggests that GA 20 mg
`SC administered QD or QOD may be equally efiective in RRMS. Larger.
`multi-center studies are warranted to confirm our findings and identifying
`the optimal dose ofGA in RRMS.
`Supported by: Wayne State University Neuroscience Program.
`Dlaclolurex Ms. Caon has nothing to disclose. Dr. Teelis has nothing to disclose. Dr.
`Chlm has nothing to disclose. Dr. Din has nothing to disclose. Dr. Zak has nothing to
`disclose Dr. Latlf has nothing to disclose. Dr. Bao has nothing to disclose. Dr. Ragheb
`has received research support from 'l'evs Neuroscience. Dr. Hudson has nothing to
`disclose. Dr. Khan has received personal compensation for activities with ‘Deva Neuro-
`science, Setono. Biogsn idea, and Bayer Health Cue Dr. Khan has received research
`support from ‘Dave Neuroscience. Serena, Biogsn idea. and Bayer Health Care.
`
`A317 NEUROLOGY '72 March 11, HID (filsppl 3)
`
`AMNEAL
`
`EXHIBIT NO. 1011 Page 1
`
` AMNEAL
`
`

`
`P06.1 41
`
`Randomized, Prospective, Rater-Blinded, Four
`Year Pilot Study To Compare the Effect of Daily
`Versus Every other Day Glatirarner Acetate 20
`mg Subcutaneous Injections in BRMS Christina Caon,
`Detroit, MI, Alexandros Tselis, Rochester Hills, MI, Wendy Ching,
`Moeein Din, Imad Zak, Zahid Latif, Fen Boo, Samia Ragheb,
`Alan Hudson, Omar Khan, Detroit, MI
`
`OBJECTIVE: We conducted a pilot trial to compare the effect of GA 20 mg
`SC daily to every other day (QOD) on clinical, MRI, and immunologic
`outcomes in RRMS. BACKGROUND: The recommended dose of glati-
`ramer acetate (GA) for the treatment of RRMS is 20 mg SC daily though
`the optimal dose remains unknown. Recent studies failed to show improved
`efficacy with higher than the recommended dose. DESIGNIMETHODS:
`Treatment naive RRMS patients were randomized to GA 20 mg SC QD or
`QOD and followed prospectively for 2 years. After 2 years, patients in each
`group were given the option to continue or switch to the other group, and
`followed for an additional 2 years. EDSS was recorded every 6 months by a
`masked-rater. Brain MRI scans were obtained at baseline, years 2 and 4.
`Blood for immunologic testing was obtained at baseline and multiple time
`points after randomization. RESULTS: 30 patients were randomized to GA
`20 mg SC given QD or QOD. Both groups were matched for age, disease
`duration, EDSS, relapse rate, and T2W lesions. After 2 years, there were no
`difference in the relapse rate, disease progression, or any MRI outcome. In
`vitro GA-proliferative responses and Th]/Th2 cybokjne expression did not
`differ between the two groups at any time point after randomization. Afier
`2 years, all patients in the QD group opted to switch to QOD. After a total
`of 4 years of prospective follow-up, there was no diflerence in the clinical
`efficacy between the “QD-QOD cross over” and the “always QOD” groups.
`Injection related lipoatrophy was significantly less in the QOD group.
`CONCLUSIONSIRELEVANCE: This pilot study suggests that GA 20 mg
`SC administered QD or QOD may be equally efi'ective in RRMS. Larger,
`multi-center studies are warranted to confirm our findings and identifying
`the optimal dose of GA in RRMS.
`Supported by: Wayne State University Neuroscience Program.
`Disclosure: Ms. Caon has nothing to disclose. Dr. Tselis has nothing to disclose. Dr.
`Ching has nothing to disclose. Dr. Din has nothing to disclose. Dr. Zak has nothing to
`disclose. Dr. Latif has nothing to disclose. Dr. Bao has nothing to disclose. Dr. Ragheb
`has received research support from ’I‘eva Neuroscience. Dr. Hudson has nothing to
`disclose. Dr. Khan has received personal compensation for activities with Teva Neuro-
`science, Serono, Biogen Idec, and Bayer Health Care. Dr. Khan has received research
`support from Teva Neuroscience, Serono, Biogen Idec, and Bayer Health Care.
`
`AMNEAL
`
`EXHIBIT NO. 1011 Page 2
`
` AMNEAL
`
`

`
`
`
`Neurology.
`v.72. no. 11,supp|. 3 (Mar. 17 2009)
`General Collection
`W1 NE337
`2009-03-23 06:45:51
`
`
`
`.5. Better Onficrwr. Etx,
`
`A/\N BWANNUAL MEETWG
`APRIL 25 *— MAY 2. 2009
`
`AMNEAL
`
`
`n
`o .
`
`2009
`
`ANNUAL
`
`MEETING
`
`PROGRAM
`
`Washir‘».gt:;n State
`Corn/ention and
`Tr
`, Ce-mer
`
`C0-Hear_iqLJarters Hotels
`° Sheraton Seattée Hcte!
`
`- Grand Hyatt Seattse
`
` AMNEAL

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket