throbber
Poster Abstracts
`
`0493
`Pharmacokinetics of oval ladvibine (Mlylinax®) after administration
`in patients with multiple sclerosis
`
`Munafo, A}, Tran, D?, Marcus, Ss, Ammoury, N1. ?Serono
`International SA, Geneva, Switzerland: “Bourn Hall Clinic, Cambridge,
`UK; hax Corp dnc, Miami, USA
`Background: Intravenous (IV) cladnbine produces clinical benefits m
`multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. Since oral administration would have
`advantages over the IV route, the bioavailability and pharmacokinetics
`of an oral cladribine formulation were assessed.
`Method: In a randomized 3-way crossover manner, 26 confirmed MS
`paticnts (mean age 44.1 years, moan weight 72 kg) cach reecived
`3 single fixed cladribine doses separated by >5 days: 3mg and 10mg
`orally
`(Mylnax-Serono/Ivax),
`and 3mg
`by
`1-h
`ITV
`infusion
`(Leustatin®-Janssen-Cilag). Blood samples were obtained before
`administration and repeatedly over 1 day thereatter. Plasma concen-
`trations were measured by HPLC/MS.
`Results: Achieved ().5-U.¢h after oral administration, peak concentra-
`tion (Cmax) averaged (geometric mean’ 5608 pg/mL and 21242pg/mL
`after 3mg and 10mg orally, respectively, compared with 21425pg/mL
`after 1-h TV infusion. Areas under the concentration-time curve (AUC)
`with 3mg and 10mg orally were 20159h-pgjmL and 76690h-pg/mL,
`respectively, and 58528h-pgfwL following TVinfusion. Mean absolure
`hinavailability was 35% and 39% following 3mg and 10mg orally,
`respectively. Vanabilty was well controlled, with a coefficient-of-
`variance of <20% intraspatient and 30-35% inter-patient, on ATIC.
`There was no evidence of chmiecally important pharmacokinetic
`noulinearity afler cual cladribine at emher dose. Tolerabilily was
`good: the only reported adverse events occurred after 3mg orally: a
`mild headache m one patient, moderate headache and vomitmg m a
`second; none were considered. treatmenr-related.
`Conclusion: Oral cladnbine has favourable pharmacckinetic and safety
`profiles following adimiuisiralion of a single dose in MS patients: a
`Phase ITI trial with oral cladnbme is underway.
`0.494
`Influence of Immunomodulatory Therapies on Anti-Myelin-Antibodies
`in Multiple Sclerosis (MIS)
`Khalil, M}, Egg, R', Reindl, M?, Lutterotti, A’, Elling, R!, Gueiss, C’,
`Kuenz, B’, Deisenhammer, F’, Berger, T’. Clinical Department of
`Neurvloyy, Inasbeuck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria
`Background: Antimyelin antibodies seem to play a role m KKMS
`paticnts. Own previous data suggested an influcnee of interfcoron-beta
`on those antibodies, measured at a single time poimt, in 26] MS
`patients.
`Objectives: This prospective study investigated the influence of disease
`moditying-drugs (DMD) on the antibody response against MOG and
`MBPafter onc year of trcatment.
`Methods: We have analyzed IgG, lgM and |zA serum antibodies
`against MOG and MBP in 49 RRMSpatients receiving various DMT
`(16 Betaferon, 11 Avonex, 6 Rebif, 7 glatiramer acetate, 9 mtravencus
`Inununegobulins) belore aud aller oue year of therapy. 14 RRMS
`patients without DMDserved as controls. None ef the patients had a
`relapse or recerved corticosteroids withm one month before bload
`sampling. FDSS was assessed every three months for
`twa vears,
`relapses had to be confirmed. Anubodies were detected by semiquan-
`lilalive Westerublov.
`Results: We found a significant mfluence of DMD on ant-MBP IgM
`antibodies after one year of treatment (p = 0.035). The change of the
`elapse rate after
`twa years of
`treatment with DMD differed
`significantly im patients posinve for anti-MBP IgM antibodies
`compared to anti-MRP TgM negative patients measured at month 12
`af treatment (p = 0.002).
`Couclusion: MBP is quantitatively the major myelin proteim. Antibody
`responses to this antigen might reflect the extent of mflammation and
`
`Tuesday, November 8, 2005
`
`$225
`
`tissue destruction in MS patients. Although number of patients and
`the follow mp periad have to he extended we suggest that anri MRP
`antibodies may serve as a biomarker for momtermg mdirectly the
`effecliveness of DMD.
`
`0495
`The cyitical vole of pro- and anti-apoptotic mediators in patients with
`multiple sclerosis
`Fl Beshlawy, W.F', Abd Allah, M’, [lawas, $°, Ghoname, N.F.
`!Newropsychiatry; “Clinical Pathulogy; *Micrubiology Tanta University,
`and Medical Fnmunology Mansoura University, Egypt
`Background: Multiple sclerosis
`(MS)
`is a chronic neurological
`disorder characterized by myelin destruction and a variable degree of
`oligodendrocyte death. Programmed ccll death (apoptosis) is critical
`for the normal development and homeostasis of the immune system.
`Apoptosis of autoreactive T cells in the CNS is likely to be important
`in preventing the development of MS. CD95/CD9SL imteraction
`results m activation-mduced apoptosis and their abnormal expression
`together with NF-kB and Bel-2 may be involved im the pathogencsis
`and the climcal course of MS.
`Aim: To study the role of pro- and anti-apoptotic mediators in MS
`patients.
`Methods: we studied the level aud expression of Fas, Fa-L, NF-kB
`and Rel-2 using RT-PCR, morphological changes of apoptosis in
`peripheral blood mononuclearcells, DNA fragmentation m 14 patients
`
`with MS divided into 3 groups, relapsing, remitting and chron
`as
`In addition, a group cf 16 healthy cases served as controls.
`Resulis: we [ound that Fas & Fas-L were siguificautly decreased in
`patients with MS compared with healthy controls. While NF-kB and
`Bel-2 were significantly moreased in patients compared with controls.
`Conclusion: Fas, Fas-1,, “f-kR and. Rel-2 play an importantrele in the
`pathogenesis of MS.
`0496
`Cognitive dysfunctions and fatigue in newly diagnosed multiple
`sclerosis patients and in the early stage of the disease
`Engel, C’, Greim, B', Zettl, UK". ‘University of Rostock, Department
`of Neuralogy, Germany
`Background: Cognitive dysfunctions and fatigue are frequent symp-
`toms im the course of multiple sclerosis (MS). There are some long-
`term studies which show stability or slow progression at any time of
`the course. No study mvestigated cogninve dysfunctions as well as
`fatigue at the time of diagnosis.
`Method: The cognitive performance of 50 patients with newly
`diagnosed multiple sclerosis was compared with that of 33 control
`subjects, matched for sex, age and education. Thetest-battery included
`tests of reasommg, verbal and nonverbal memory, alertness, divided
`and focused attcntion. Tests were applied at diagnosis, a half, onc and
`three years later. l'atizue was measured subjectively by the Modified
`Fatiguc Impact Seale and abjectively by a test of vigilance. Physical
`disability (EDSS) and depression (BDI) were controlled.
`Resulis: Paticuis had au average age of33 years, a mean EDSS-score of
`1.8. 92% suffered from a relapsing-remitting MS. At baseline 50% of
`the patients were cognitively unimpaired, 38% showed mild and 12%
`moderate cognitive deterioration. Patients performed. significantly
`poorer
`than contrals m nonverbal memory and reaction-time.
`Ne differences were found in reasouing aud verbal memory. Three
`years later no improvement m cognitive performance was found.
`Tatigue was reported in 63%at baseline and oneyear later. After three
`years only 47% suffered from it. Throaghont testing the BDT-score
`was significantly correlated with subjective fatigue.
`frequent
`Condusion: Cognitive dysfunctions
`and.
`fatigue were
`symptoms already m newly diagnosed MS patients. After three years
`the coguilive performance as well as the reported fatigue did uot
`increase.
`
`Hopewell EX1072
`Hopewell v. Merck
`IPR2023-00480
`
`Hopewell EX1072
`Hopewell v. Merck
`IPR2023-00480
`
`1
`
`

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