Evidence Hub

Palovarotene for Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva (FOP): Results of a Randomized, Placebo‐Controlled, Double‐Blind Phase 2 Trial

R. Pignolo, G. Baujat, Edward C. Hsiao, R. Keen, Amy Wilson, J. Packman, A. Strahs, D. Grogan et al.

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 2022

21 participants · 38 citations

Abstract

Fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) is an ultra‐rare genetic disorder characterized by progressive heterotopic ossification (HO), often heralded by flare‐ups, leading to reduced movement and life expectancy. This placebo‐controlled, double‐blind trial (NCT02190747) evaluated palovarotene, an orally bioavailable selective retinoic acid receptor gamma agonist, for prevention of HO in patients with FOP. Patients experiencing a flare‐up were enrolled in two cohorts: (1) patients ≥15 years were randomized 3:1 to palovarotene 10/5 mg (weeks 1–2/3–6) or placebo; (2) patients ≥6 years were randomized 3:3:2 to palovarotene 10/5 mg, palovarotene 5/2.5 mg (weeks 1–2/3–6), or placebo. Cohort data were pooled. The primary endpoint was the proportion of responders (no/minimal new HO at flare‐up body region by plain radiograph) at week 6. Change from baseline in HO volume and new HO incidence were assessed by computed tomography (CT) at week 12. Tissue edema was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or ultrasound. Forty patients (aged 7–53 years) were enrolled (placebo: n = 10; palovarotene 5/2.5 mg: n = 9; palovarotene 10/5 mg: n = 21). Disease history was similar between groups. In the per‐protocol population, the proportion of responders at week 6 by plain radiograph was 100% with palovarotene 10/5 mg; 88.9% with palovarotene 5/2.5 mg; 88.9% with placebo (Cochran‐Armitage trend test: p = 0.17). At week 12, the proportions were 95.0% with palovarotene 10/5 mg; 88.9% with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 21 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free