`
`he Randomized, double-blind, dose-
`comparison study of glatiramer acetate in
`relapsing—remitting MS
`
`J.A. Cohen, MD; M. Rovaris, MD; AD. Goodman, MD; D. Ladkani, PhD; D. Wynn, MD;
`and M. Filippi, MD; for the 9006 Study Group
`
`
`
`Abstract—Objective: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of glatirarner acetate (GA) 40 mg daiiy vs the
`approved 20—mg formulation in relapsing—remitting multiple sclerosis. Methods: Eiigibility criteria included clinically
`definite multiple sclerosis, Expanded Disability Status Scale score 0 to 5.0, no previous use of GA, at least one relapse in
`l the previous year, and 1 to E5 gadolinium-enhancing (GdE) lesions on a screening MRI. MRI was repeated at months 3, 7,
`8, and 9, and neurologic examinations were performed at baseline and months 3, 6, and 9. Results: Of‘ 229 subjects
`screened, 90 were randomly assigned to GA 20 mg (n = 44) or 40 mg (n = 46). The groups were well matched at baseline
`for demographic, clinical, and MRI characteristics. The primary efficacy endpoint, total number of GdE lesions at months
`7, B, and 9, showed a trend favoring the 40-mg group (38% relative reduction, p = 0.0898). A difference between the two
`dose groups emerged as early as month 3 (52% reduction; p = 0.0051). There was a trend favoring the 40mg group for
`relapse rate with benefit on proportion of relapse-free subjects {p = 0.0183) and time to first relapse (p = 0.0357). GA 40
`mg was well tolerated, with an overall safety profile similar to that of 20 mg. Some features ofinjection site reactions and
`immediate postinje'ction reactions were more common and severe with the higher dose. Conclusions: Glatiramer acetate
`(GA) 40 mg was safe and well tolerated. The overall efficacy resuits suggested that a 40—mg dose of GA may be more
`effective than the currently approved 20-mg daily dose in reducing MRI activity and clinical relapses.
`NEUROLOGY 2007;08:939—944
`_—~_—-——_n_m_uu—_.___
`
`Three pivotal trials"4 and a meta—analysis of those
`sinudies5 support the benefit of glatiramer acetate
`(GA) 20 mg by daily subcutaneous injection on re-
`lapse rate, accumulation of disability, and MRI 1e-
`eion
`activity in relapsing—remitting multiple
`sclerosis (RRMS). In addition, a long—term open-label
`study6 and use for more than a decade in clinical
`practice also demonstrate the safety and tolerability
`of GA.
`
`There are few published data regarding other
`doses of GA. In an early study,'-' three patients with
`acute disseminated encephalomyelitis were treated
`with GA 2 to 3 mg by daily IM injection for 2 weeks.
`In the same study, four patients with terminal mul-
`tiple sclerosis (M3) were treated with 2 to 3 mg every
`2 to 3 days for three weeks and then 2 to 3 mg
`
`Additional material related to this article can he found on the Nnurm'ogy
`Web site. Go to wwmeurologynrg and scroll down the Table of' Con-
`
`tcnts for the March 20 issue to find the title link for this article.
`
`weekly over 2 to 5 months. No adverse effects were
`seen in this small pilot study, but no definite conclu-
`sions regarding efficacy could be drawn. In a second
`preliminary open—label study,3 12 patients with
`chronic progressive MS and 4 with RRMS were
`treated with GA 5 mg by IM injection five times per
`week for 3 weeks, three times per week for 3 weeks,
`twice per week for 3 weeks, and then once per week
`for the remainder of a 6-month period. Many of the
`patients demonstrated initial improvement, but ever
`time and as the dose was reduced, the response dis-
`appeared. Over the next year, the dose was gradu—
`ally increased to 20 mg per day, Among the 15
`subjects who completed the study, 2 of 3 patients
`with RRMS and 3 of 12 with chronic progressive MS
`were described as improved. GA was well tolerated
`in this study. The randomized controlled trial of 50
`subjects with RRMS by Bernstein et al.1 tested 20
`mg by daily subcutaneous injection and demon-
`strated a beneficial treatment effect on relapses and
`disability progression with good tolerability. In a
`
`From the Mellon Center fer MS Treatment and Reward! (J.A.C.), Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland. OH; r'euroimaging Research Unit (MIL, 31.17.),
`Dcpartmcnr. of NQUI'DIOSM 3311 Rflflhnlfl Scientific Institute. Milan, Italy,- Department of Neurology (A.D.G.), University of Rochester, Rochmtcr. NY; Tova
`Pharmaceuticals (11L). Petlwll Tiqva, Israel; and Consultants in Neurology (D.W.), Nurthbrook, EL.
`Disclosure: This study was funded by Tova Pharmaceuticals, of which Dr. Ladkani is an employee. The olhcr authors have served as paid consultants or
`SPERM!” For 'l‘evn Pharmaceuticals {less than $10,000 per year) and have received research support to their institutions, but none has a personal financial
`investment, ownership. equity. or other financial hoidings.
`l‘reiiminary results were presented at the annual meetings of the American Academy of
`Neurology in April 2006 in San Diego, CA, and thc European Committee for Treatment. and Research in Multiple Sclerosis in September 2006 in Madrid,
`Spain.
`Received June 7. 2006. Accepted in final form November 28, 2006.
`Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Jeffrey A. Cohen. Melien Center 13-10, Cleveland Clinic Foundation. 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland. OH
`44195: e—mail: coheanccliorg
`
`Copyright 3!} 2007 by AAN Enterprises, Inc.
`939
`Copyright © by AAN Enterprises, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 1
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 1
`
`

`

`subsequent study of 106 subjects with chronic pro-
`gressive MS? GA was administered subcutaneously
`at a dose of 15 mg twice per day for 2 years. This
`dose was well tolerated and demonstrated benefit on
`
`some disability endpoints. All subsequent studies of
`GA administered by injection used a 20-mg daily
`dose, the currently approved regimen. No dose com—
`parison study has been published. In this study, we
`sought to evaluate the efficacy,
`tolerability, and
`safety of GA at a dose of 40 mg by daily subcutane-
`ous injection in RRMS.
`
`Methods. Subjects. Eighteen centers in the United States par-
`ticipated in this study (see appendix E—l on the Neurology Web
`site at www.craurologycrg for investigators and study commit-
`tees). Enrollment started in October 2003 and was completed in
`January 2005. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were nearly
`identical to those in the European/Canadian MRI trial.‘ Key inclu-
`sion criteria inciuded clinically definite MS,1° age 18 to 50 years
`inclusive, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score 0 to 5.0,
`at least one clinical relapse in the previous year, and 1 to 15
`gadolinium-enhancing (GdE) lesions on an MRI scan obtained at
`screening. Key exclusion criteria included relapse or steroid treat-
`ment within 30 days of the screening visit or between the screen-
`ing and baseline visits, previous GA therapy, interferon therapy
`within 60 days, immunosuppressant therapy within 6 months,
`previous use of cladribine or total lymphoid irradiation, investiga-
`tional therapy within 6 months, known sensitivity to mannitol,
`and inability to undergo MRI with paramagnetic contrast agents.
`The protocol and consent documents were approved by the institu-
`tional
`review boards of the participating centers. Subjects
`provided written informed consent before undergoing any study-
`related procedures.
`Treatment. Eligible subjects were equally randomized to re-
`ceive GA (Copaxonea’) 20 mg or 40 mg by a single daily subcutane«
`out: injection for 9 months. The randomization list, stratified by
`study center, was computer generated by the Tova Statistical
`Data Management Department. The drug preparations were iden-
`tical except for GA concentration. Subjects and all personnel in-
`volved in the study were blinded to treatment assignment. Subject
`and investigator biinding were not formally assessed.
`Design. The trial was a multicenter, randomized, double-
`blind, parallel-group, dose-comparison study lasting 9 months. For
`trial purposes, a month was defined as 28 t 4 days. At each study
`site, a treating neuroiogist was responsible for the overall medical
`management of subjects including safety monitoring. An examin-
`ing neurologist performed a standardized neurologic examination,
`Timed 25-Foot Wall; (TZEFW), and calcuiated Functional System
`scores and EDSS score (Neurostatus, L. Kappos, MD, Department
`of Neurology, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland) at sched-
`uled and unscheduled visits.
`At the screening visit, potential subjects were informed about
`ail aspects of the study, gave written informed consent, and then
`underwent physical and neurologic examinations including E1358
`and TEBFW, laboratory studies, and brain MRI. The MRI analysis
`center reviewed the results of the MRI and notified the site
`whether the subject qualified based on MRI criteria. Subjects re—
`turned for the baseline visit within 14 days of the screening MRI
`and were randomized to one of two doses of GA using an interac-
`tive voice response system. MRI obtained at screening also served
`as the pretreatment baseline MRI. MRI was repeated at months 3,
`'l', 8, and 9 or at early termination {if the subject had been in the
`trial at least 3 months). Scheduled MRI scans were not delayed
`because of steroid treatment for a confirmed relapse. Neurologic
`evaluations were performed at baseiine and then every 3 months.
`Vital signs (blood pressure, pulse, and temperature}, adverse
`events, and concomitant medications were assessed at baseline
`and then at months 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 9 or early termination.
`Height and weight were measured at screening, and weight was
`measured at month 9 or early termination. Laboratory safety as-
`sessments (hematology, serum chemistries, and urinalysis) and
`EKG were performed at baseline and then at months 1, 3, 6, and 9
`or early termination. Blood samples for anti-GA antibodies were
`940 NEUROLOGY 68 March 20, 2007
`
`coilected at baseline and then at every 3 months or eariy
`termination.
`A relapse was defined as the appearance of one or more new
`neurologic symptoms, or the reappearance of one or more previ-
`ously experienced symptoms lasting at least 48 hours, not accom-
`panied by fever or infection, and preceded by a stable or improving
`neurologic state over the previous 30 days. Subjects were in-
`structed to notify the study center of a potential change in neuro-
`logic status immediately, and an unscheduled visit was conducted
`within '7 days of nodfication. An event was counted as a relapse
`only when the subject’s symptoms were accompanied by objective
`changes in the examining neurologist’s examination correspond-
`ing to an increase of at least 0.5 steps on the EDSS, one grade in
`two or more Emotional System scores, or two grades in one Func~
`tional System score. isolated changes in bowel, bladder, and cog-
`nitive function did not qualify as relapses. The treating
`neurologist determined whether the change in symptoms qualified
`as an tin-study relapse, which could be treated at the discretion of
`the treating neurologist with a standard LOUD-mg dose of IV
`methylprednisolone for 3 consecutiVe days without an orai taper.
`The Steering Committee supervised the conduct of the study.
`An independent Data Safety Monitoring Board met five times via
`teleconference during the trio‘s to review study conduct and
`blinded safety data and a sixth time after completion of the trial
`to review unblinded safety results. They had the authority to
`recommend discontinuation of the trial for safety concerns.
`MRI scanning and analysis. The MRI Analysis Center in the
`Neuroimaging Research Unit, San Raffaelc Scientific Institute,
`Milan, italy, served as the MRI analysis center. Participating
`centers submitted a test scan of a volunteer with clinicaiiy definite
`MS for approval before enroliing subjects. All sites had 1.0- or
`1.5-T scanners. Dual-echo spin-echo sequences (repetition time
`[TR] 2,200 to 3,000, echo time (TE) 15 to 50180 to 100, echo train
`length 4 to 6, 3-mm slice thickness, and 44 contiguous axial slices}
`were used to obtain proton density and T2-weighted images. T1-
`weighted images (TR 450 to 650, TE 10 to 20) with the same scan
`geometry were obtained 5 minutes after injection of 0.1 mmoll'kg
`of Gd. Slices were positioned to run parallel to a line joining the
`most inferoanterior and infcroposterior parts of the corpus callo—
`sum. Subjects were carefuily repositioned at follow-up according
`to published guidelines.n
`Image quality was reviewed at the MRI analysis center using
`predetermined criteria. Unsatisfactory images were rejected, but
`not repeated. Identification of GdE, T2~hyperintense, and T1-
`hypointense lesions was performed by consensus of two experi-
`enced observers, as previously describedfi” Trained technicians
`then outlined the lesions using a semiautomated segmentation
`technique based on local thresholding,“ with reference to marked
`hard copies. Lesion volumes were calcuiated automatically. in a
`previous study using the same measurement technique, the me-
`dian intraobserver coefficients of variation were 1.6% (range 1.8%
`to 6.2%) for T2 and 4.0% (range 2.2% to 8.4%) for T1 lesion ioads.”
`Treating and examining neurologists at the sites were blinded to
`MRI results during the study.
`Outcome measures. The primary efficacy outcome measure
`was total number of (ME MRI lesions at months '7, 8, and 9.
`Secondary outcome measures ineluded totai number of new GdE
`lesions at months 8 and 9, total number of new T2—hyperintense
`lesions at months 8 and 9, change from baseline to termination in
`TZ-hyperiutense lesion voiume, relapse rate, and change from
`baseline to each visit in the T25F‘W. Prespecified exploratory end-
`points included change from baseline to termination in total GdE
`lesion volume, change from baseline to termination in total 'i‘l-
`hypointense lesion volume, MRI metrics at month 3, and change
`from baseline to each visit in EDSS. Post hoc analyses included
`time to first relapse, proportion of relapse-free subjects, and re-
`sponder analyses.
`Statistical analysis. All efficacy and safety analyses were per-
`formed on the intent~to~treat (ITT) cohort, defined as all: random-
`ized subjects. For analysis of the primary efficacy endpoint, the
`additional condition of having at least one MRI scan at month 7,
`8, or 9 was required to permit statistical analysis, resulting in 39
`subjects on GA 20 mg and 42 subjects on GA 40 mg. Analysis of
`the primary efficacy outcome and other analyses of GdE or new
`TZ-hyperintense Eesions used quasi-likelihood (ovordispersed)
`Poisson regression (SAS PROC GENMOD) employing DEST :
`POI and DSCALE in the options of the MODEL statement with
`
`Copyright © by AAN Enterprises. Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 2
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 2
`
`

`

`Screened
`(41:27.9)
`
`
`
`Smut-alum ("3139)
`- Nnemravgdeycnsuflh
`
`' WiU’IGKEW 309%“ (3)
`- lrmlm‘m‘hwunll)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Randomized
`(n=90)
`
`Wflhdm [mm mm (n=6)
`\‘flthdrcwfrom study (we:
`. Lastlolotmum‘é)
`. (sometimes [2;
`~ thcmwcomenltll
`
`
`- vawm‘fifllfl)
`- Adv-urn event“)
`
`
`
`9-month follow-up on
`E-monlh follow-up on
`treatment
`treatment
`
`
`(osdo)
`(n=33)
`
`
`
`
`Figure 1. Trial profile. GA = glaiiramer acetate.
`
`an offset based on the log of proportion of available scans (113, 2/3,
`01' 3(3). Baseline GdE lesion count and center effects were used as
`covariates in the model in addition to the treatment effect. The
`numbers of subjects withdrawing early due to adverse events were
`compared usingr the Fisher exact test, and time to withdrawal was
`analyzed by log-rank test. Relapse rates were analyzed using Pois-
`son regression with relapse rate in the year before entry and
`baseline EDSS as oovariates. Analysis of proportion of relapse-free
`subjects used the )8 test. Time to first confirmed relapse was
`displayed graphically by Kaplan—Meier curves and analyzed by
`log-rank test. In post hoc anaiyses, subjects were classified as
`responders or nonresponders based on the occurrence of reiapses,
`EDSS progression, and the presence of GdE or new T2-
`hyperintense lesions at months 7, 8, and 9. Analyses based on two
`definitions were performed using logistic regression adjusted for
`site and baseline GdE lesion number. All reported p values were
`two-tailed. Data analysis was performed by Teva Pharmaceutical
`Industries, Israel. The authors had independent access to the
`data.
`Sample size was based on the results of the European/Cana-
`dian MRI Study.‘ It was estimated that 50 evaluable subjects per
`
`group would provide 90% poWer to detect a 60% treatment effect
`between the groups in the total number of GdE lesions at months
`7, 8. and 9 with two-sided a = 0.05.
`
`Results. Follow-up. Subject accrual and follow-up are
`summarized in figure 1. The most common reason for
`screen failure was lack of GdE lesions on screening MRI.
`Three subjects withdrew consent, and one subject did not
`return for the baseline visit. Because of slow accrual, re-
`cruitment was discontinued when 90 subjects were en-
`rolled, 44 on GA 20 mg and 46 on GA 40 mg. Thirty-nine
`subjects on GA 20 mg and 42 subjects on GA 40 mg had at
`least one MRI scan at month 7, 8, or 9 required for inclu-
`sion in the ITT cohort for the primary efficacy endpoint.
`Thirty-eight subjects completed 9 months of double-blind
`treatment on GA 20 mg, and 40 on GA 40 mg. Early
`withdrawal due to adverse events was uncommon and oc—
`curred in 1 subject (2.3%} on GA 20 mg vs 4- subjects (8.7 95;)
`on GA 40 mg (p = 0.36). The subject on 20 mg withdrew
`from the study after experiencing severe dyspnea, speech
`disorder, and panic reaction immediately after injection,
`assessed as related to study medication by the investiga-
`tor. The adverse events leading to early termination of 4
`subjects on 40 mg included immediate postinjection reac-
`tion (iPIR; n = 2),
`injection site reaction, (n i l), and
`increased fatigue (n = 1}. There was no difference in time
`to withdrawal due to adverse events (1; = 0.95).
`Demographic and. baseline disease characteristics. De-
`mographic, clinical, and MRI characteristics of the two
`treatment groups were well matched at baseline (table 1).
`The overall study population had active disease with an
`average of 1.5 relapses in the previous year and 3.4 GdE
`lesions at entry.
`MRI outcomes. The results of clinical and MRI efficacy
`analyses are summarized in table 2. Mean total GdE lesion
`number at months 7, 8, and 9 showed a trend favoring GA
`40 mg representing a 38% relative reduction vs GA 20 mg.
`Mean GdE lesions at months 7, 8, and 9 decreased in both
`groups compared with baseline, by 65% in the GA 20 mg
`
`
`Table 1 Baseline demographic and disease characteristics
`
`GA 20 mg
`GA 40 mg
`Characteristic
`(n = 44)
`(n = 46)
`Total
`
`
`37.2 (6.7)
`37.4 (6.5)
`37.1 (7.0)
`Age, mean (SD), years
`68117696)
`3'7 (80%)
`31 (73%)
`Female
`82 (91%)
`44 (96%)
`38 (86%)
`White
`7.1(6.3)
`6.7 (6.4)
`7.4 (6.2)
`Years since symptom onset, mean (SD)
`3.5 (4.3)
`3.8 (4.8)
`3.2 (3.7)
`Years since diagnosis, mean (SD)
`1.5 (0.8)
`1.5 (0.8)
`1.5 (0.8}
`Its-lapses in previous year. mean (SD)
`2.0 (1.1)
`2.1 (1.0)
`2.0 {1.2)
`Actual EDSS score, mean (SD)
`2.0 (1.0)
`2.0 (0.9)
`2.0 (1.2)
`Converted EDSS score, mean (SD)
`5.0 (1.2)
`5.1(13)
`4.9 (1.3)
`T25FW', mean (SD), seconds
`3.4 (3.2)
`3.4 (3.1)
`3.4 (3.3)
`GdE lesion number, mean (SD)
`2.0 (1—15)
`2.0 (1—14)
`2.0 (1—15}
`GdE lesion number, median (range)
`0.89 (2.73)
`1.17 {3.74)
`0.59 (0.686)
`GdE lesion volume, mean (SD), 1111..
`17.96 (15.23.)
`13.89 (14.71)
`16.97 (15.83)
`T2-hyperintense lesion voiurne, mean (SD), mL
`
`Tl-hypointense lesion volume, mean (SD), mL 4.03 (5.67) 3.65 (6.38) 4.39 (4.97)
`
`
`
`GA = glatiramer acetate; EDSS fl Expanded Disability Status Scale; T25FW = Timed 25—Foot Walk; GdE = gadolinium—enhancing.
`March 20, 2007 NEUROLOGY 63 941
`
`Copyright © by AAN Enterprises. Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 3
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 3
`
`

`

`Table 2 Clinical and MRI ofl'icacy results
`
`GA 20 mg
`GA 4-0 mg
`
`Endpoint
`(n = 44)
`(n = 46)
`Effect size (95% CI)
`p Value
`
`Primary endpoint
`
`Total number of GdE lesions months 7, S, 9;
`mean (SD)*
`
`Secondary endpoints
`
`Total number of new GdE lesions months
`6, 9; mean (SD)
`
`Total number of new T2—hyperintense lesions
`months 8, 9; mean (SD)
`
`TZ-hyperintense lesion volume change LOV
`vs baseline, 1111113, adjusted mean (SE)
`
`Total number of confirmed relapses,
`mean (SD)
`
`MSFC change at each visit vs baseline
`
`Prespecified and post hoc exploratory
`endpoints
`
`GdE lesion volume change LOV vs
`baseline, nuns, adjusted mean (SE)
`
`Tl-hypointense lesion volume change
`LOV vs baseline, nil-n3, adjusted mean (SE)
`Number of GdE lesions month 3,
`mean. (SD)
`
`Relapse-free subjects
`
`Time to first confirmed relapse
`(20th percentile), days
`
`EDSS change at each visit vs baseline
`
`Responders?
`
`3.62 (4.06)
`
`2.26 (4.06)
`
`Rate ratio 0.62 {0.36, 1.08)
`
`0.0898
`
`1.41 (1.86)
`
`1.00 (1.91)
`
`Rate ratio 0.73 (0.39, 1.35)
`
`1.38 (1.76)
`
`1.00 (2.00)
`
`Rate ratio 0.70 (0.38, 1.30)
`
`800 (1,144)
`
`1,516 (1,095)
`
`Difference 715 (—3,678, 2,248)
`
`0.52 (0.59)
`
`0.30 (0.59)
`
`Rate ratio 0.59 (0.31, 1.16)
`
`0.311
`
`0.256
`
`0.631
`
`0.121
`
`No change or between-group
`difference
`
`-634 (50.81)
`
`—801(49.55)
`
`Difference 117 (—16, 251)
`
`0.0841
`
`122.29 (115.71)
`
`32.23 (109.72)
`
`Difference 90.16 (“208.10, 388.42)
`
`0.543
`
`52.63.0132)
`
`1.33 (1.58)
`
`Rate ratio 0.48 (0.29, 0.82)
`
`23/44 (52.3%)
`NNT = 1.9
`
`35I'46 (76.1%)
`NNT “—~ 1.3
`
`80
`
`213
`
`Risk. ratio 0.60 (0.27, 0.91)
`
`0.0051
`
`0.0183
`
`0.0367
`
`No change or between-group
`difference
`
`15/39 (38.5%)
`NNT = 2.6
`
`29.142 (69.0%)
`NNT = 1.5
`
`Odds ratio 3.51 (1.39, 8.88)
`
`0.0078
`
`0.0049
`Odds ratio 3.12 (1.00, 11.13)
`13140 (32.5%)
`5/37 (13.5%)
`Responderst
`
`NNT = 7.4 NNT = 3.1
`
`* 39 of44 subjects on 20 mg and 42 of 46 subjects on 40 mg had at least one MRI scan at month 7, S, or 9.
`T Relapse free with no gadolinium-enhancing (GdE) lesions at months 7, 8, and 9 or a reduction in the mean number reduced by at
`least 50% vs baseline.
`.1: Relapse free, no Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) progression, no GdE lesions at months 7, 8, and 9; and no new T2-
`hy'perinteose lesions at the last assessment vs baseline.
`
`GA = glatiramer acetate; LOV = last observed value; MSFC = multiple sclerosis functional composite; NNT = number needed to treat.
`
`group and. 75% in the GA 40 mg group (p < 0.0001 for
`both; figure 2). The advantage of 40 mg over 20 mg was
`apparent as early as month 3 (figure 2). Trends favoring 40
`mg were seen in change from baseline to last observed
`value of GdE lesion volume, total number of new GdE
`lesions at months 8 and 9, and new T2—hyperintense le-
`sions at months 8 and 9. There were no difi'erences in
`change from baseline to last observation in total T2-
`hyperintense or 'l‘l-hypointense lesion volumes.
`Clinical outcomes. On—study relapse rate decreased in
`both groups compared with the previous year. Mean on-
`study relapse rate showed a trend favoring GA 40 mg, with
`a greater proportion of relapse—free subjects and delay in
`the time to first confirmed relapse. EDSS and T25FW did
`942 NEUROLOGY 68 March 20, 2007
`
`not change in either treatment group, and there were no
`between-group differences at any time point. In a post hoc
`analysis,
`two definitions of treatment responders were
`used, both showing benefit favoring GA 40 mg.
`Safety and. tolerability. Safety profiles of the two GA
`doses were similar. There were no deaths or significant
`efi'ects on vital signs. There were two serious adverse
`events. A subject treated with GA 40 mg was hospitalized
`after an EPIR and subsequently discontinued from the
`study. A subject treated with GA 20 mg was involved in a
`motor vehicle accident, classified as unrelated to study’
`drug.
`Injection site reactions were the most frequent adverse
`event for both doses, occurring in 38 (86.4%) subjects in
`
`Copyright © by AAN Enterprises. Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 4
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 4
`
`

`

`5.0
`
`
`
`
`
` GdELesionNumber(mean1SE)
`
`El
`%&d123i56789
`Months
`9e“
`Figure 2. Gadolinium-enhancing (GdE) lesion number at
`each visit.
`
`the 20-mg group and 39 (84.8%) in the 40-Lng group. Injec-
`tion site manifestations reported with at least 5% higher
`incidence for GA 40 mg included burning, mass, pain, and
`urticaria (table 3). Skin necrosis and lipoatrophy were not
`observed. Thirty-nine IPiRs occurred in 10 (22.7%) sub-
`jects on GA 20 mg vs 52 IPIRs in 15 (32.6%) subjects on
`GA 40 mg. The incidence in the 20-mg group was consis-
`tent with previous large studies of GA.“3 IPIRS were cate-
`gorized most often as moderate severity in the 40-mg
`group and mild in the 20-mg group. All IPle resolved
`without sequelae, although one in the 40-mg group led to
`hospitalization and subsequent discontinuation from the
`study. The greatest difference among lPIR component
`symptoms (flushing, palpitations,
`tachycardia, dyspnea,
`and chest pain) was in palpitations. Affect lability was
`reported by 6 subjects (13%) treated with GA 40 mg and by
`none in the GA 20 mg group. All cases were assessed as
`not related to study drug by the investigator, and in no
`case was study drug discontinued.
`Postbaseline shifts to abnormal laboratory values were
`seen for white blood cell count, platelets, eosinophils, glu-
`
`Table 3 Number and percentage of subjects experiencing adverse
`events with frequency differing by 5% or greater in the 40-mg
`group compared with the 20-mg group
`
`Adverse event
`
`Injection site burning
`Injection site mass
`Injection site pain
`Urticaria
`
`Any symptom of IPIR
`Palpitations
`Flushing
`Affect lability
`Muscle cramp
`Pharyngitis
`Headache
`
`Hypoesthesia
`Paresthesia
`
`GA 20 mg
`(11 = 44)
`
`6 (13.6%)
`9 (20.5%)
`9 (20.5%)
`1 {2.3%}
`
`10 (22.7%)
`1 (2.3%)
`6 (13.6%)
`0
`0
`0
`4- 03.1%)
`
`4 (9.1%)
`6 (13.6%)
`
`GA 40 mg
`(n s 46)
`
`13 (28.3%)
`.16 (34.8%)
`14 (30.4%)
`5 (10.9%)
`
`15 (32.6%)
`5 (10.9%)
`9 (19.6%)
`6 (13%)
`3 (6.5%)
`3 (6.5%)
`7 (15.2%)
`
`7 (15.2%)
`1 (2.2%)
`
`GA = glatirarner acetate; IPIR = immediate postinjection
`reaction.
`
`cose. cholesterol, and liver enzymes. In general, these ab-
`normalities were transient, mild, and uncommon and
`occurred with equal incidence in the two groups. Most of
`the potentially clinically significant laboratory abnormali—
`ties seemed to be related to concomitant medical condi-
`
`tions. An unexpected finding of isolated occurrences of
`hypocalcemia in approximately 18% of subjects in both
`groups was without clear—cut explanation. No EKG abnor-
`mality was attributed to GA.
`
`Discussion. The safety and efficacy of GA at the
`currently approved Ell-mg daily dose are supported
`by three pivotal trials,” a meta-analysis of those
`studies,5 a long-term follow—up study? and postmar-
`keting experience. This 9-month multicenter, ran“
`domized,
`double-blind,
`parallel-group
`trial
`represents the first dose—comparison study of GA.
`There was a trend favoring the 40-mg dose on the
`primary endpoint, total number of GdE lesions at
`months 7, 8, and 9, which was supported by signifi-
`cant results or trends favoring 40 mg on other
`secondary and exploratory MRI endpoints, relapse—
`related endpoints, and responder analyses.
`There have been three previous trials of the MRI
`effects of GA. In a small, single—arm crossover
`study,25 Mancardi et al. demonstrated a 57% reduc-
`tion in the frequency of new GdE lesions during 20
`mg GA treatment compared with the pretreatment
`baseline period. In an ancillary study of 27 subjects
`enrolled at one site in the US pivotal
`trial in
`RRMS,16 GA treatment produced significant reduc-
`tions in GdE lesions and brain volume loss. The most
`definitive study was the EuropeanJCanadian MRI
`trial,“ which demonstrated significant reduction in
`cumulative GdE lesions on monthly MRI scans over
`9 months favoring GA 20 mg over placebo. Consis-
`tent differences favoring active treatment were seen
`on
`other GdE-related
`endpoints,
`new T2-
`hyperintense lesions, and relapse rate (33% reduc-
`tion). Treatment with GA also reduced the
`proportion of new lesions that evolved into chronic
`Tl-hypointense lesions (“black holes"),‘7 which are
`thought to indicate more severe tissue damagefisdi’
`The design of the current trial was modeled after
`the EuropeonJCanadion MRI trial. In general, sub-
`jects treated with GA 20 mg in the current study
`fared somewhat better than the GA 20 mg group in
`the EuropeanICanadian MRI trial. For example, the
`mean number of GdE lesions at termination was re-
`duced by approximately 65% compared with 48% in
`the previous study. This variability probably is due
`to differences in study populations. Subjects enrolled
`in the European/Canadian MRI trial had more active
`disease as indicated by a mean of 4.2 GdE lesions on
`the baseline MRI vs 3.4. Other factors also may have
`played a role, including different “regression to the
`mean” or unknown confounders.
`
`In the EuropeanfCanadian MRI trial, the mean
`and median cumulative numbers of GdE lesions in
`the two treatment groups seemed to diverge between
`months 3 and 6.“ This result has been interpreted as
`March 20, 2007 NEUROIDGY 68
`543
`
`Copyright © by AAN Enterprises. Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 5
`
`MYLAN PHARMS. INC. EXHIBIT 1065 PAGE 5
`
`

`

`3.
`
`10.
`
`11.
`
`12.
`
`13.
`
`M.
`
`. Johnson KP, Brooks BR, Cohen JA, et al. Copolymcr 1 reduces relapse
`rate and improves disability in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis:
`results ore phase III multicenter. doubleblind. placebo—controlled trial.
`Neurology 1995:45:1263—1276.
`Johnson KP, Brooks BR, Cohen JA, et ai. Extended use of glatiramer
`acetate (Copaxone) is well tolerated and maintains its clinical effect on
`multiple sclerosis relapse rate and degree ofdisubilily. Neurology 1998:
`50:701—703.
`the Enropeam'Canadian Glakiramer
`. Comi G, Filippi M. Wolinsky .18,
`Acetate Study Group. European/Canadian multicenter, double-blind,
`randomized, placebo-controlled study ol‘the effects ofgiatiramer acetate
`on magnetic resonance imaging-measured disease activity and burden
`in patimts with relapsing mulliple sclerosis. Ann Neurol mink-19:290-
`297.
`. Boneschi FM. llovaris M, Johnson KP, et al. Eil'ecls ol' glatiramer ace-
`tate on relapse-rate and accumulated disability in multiple sclerosis:
`meta-analysis of three double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled
`clinical trials. Molt Scler 2003:9:3119w355.
`. Ford C, Johnson KP, Lisak RP, ct 111. A prospEctivo Open,‘lflbcl study of
`glutimmcr acetate: over a decade of continuous use in multiple sclerosis
`patients. Mult Sclcr 2006;12:309—320.
`. Abrumsky O, Teizelbaum D. Arman 2. Effect. of a synthetic polypeptide
`(Cop 1) on patients with multiple sclerosis and with acute disseminated
`cnccplmlomyelilis. J Neurol Sci 1977;31:433—438.
`. Bornsmin MB, Miller Al. ’I‘eitelhaurn D, (31. a]. Multiple sclerosis: trial of
`a synthetic polypeptide. Ann Neurol 1932;11:317—319.
`Bernstein MB, Miller A. Slagle S, ct ul. A placebo-controlled. double.
`blind, randomized. two‘ccntcr, pilot. trial of Cop l in chronic progressive
`multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1991;41:533—539.
`Poser C, Poly D. Scheinberg L, et ul. New diagnostic criteria for multi-
`ple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol 1983;13:
`227—231.
`Miller DH, Barkhof F, Berry 1, et ul. Mugzlelic resonance imaging in
`monitoring the treatment of multiple sclerosis: concerted action guide-
`lines. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1991;54:683—688.
`Barkhoi‘ F, Filippi M. van Woesberghe JR. et el.
`improving inter-
`ohserver variation in reporting gadolinium-enhanced MR1 lesions in
`multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1997;49:1682—1688.
`Filippi M. Gowns-Cain ML, Gasperini C, or al. Effect of training and
`different measurement strategies on the reproducibility of brain MRI
`lesion [earl measurements in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1998;50:
`23842:”.
`llovaris M, Filippi M, Calm-i G, ot. a]. Intro-observer reproducibility in
`measuring new putative MR markers ol‘domyelination nnrl arena] loss
`in multiple sclerosis: a comparison with conventional 'l‘2-weighted im-
`ages. J Neural 1997;244:266—270.
`Mancardi GL, Sardanelli F, Parudi RC, at 9.1. Effect of copolymer—l on
`serial gadolinium-enhanced MRI in relapsing remitting multiple sclero-
`sis. Neurology 1998;50:1127—31133.
`Ge Y, Grossman RI, Udupn JR, et at. Glatiramer acetate {Copaxonel
`treatment in relapsing-remitting MS: quantitative MR assessment.
`Neurology 2000;54:313-617.
`Filippi M. Rovuris M, Rocco MA. et al. Gletiromcr acetate reduces the
`proportion of new MB lmions evolving into “black holes.” Neurology
`200l;572731—733.
`Brock W. Bitech A, Koleuda H. et el. Inflammatory central nervous
`system demyelinalion: correlation of mugneLic resonance imaging find-
`ings with lesion pathology. Ann Neurol 1997;42:783—793.
`van Waldervecn MAA, Burkhol' F, Hommes OR, et ul. Correlating MR