The clinical trial is intended to assess for clinical evidence of Clemastine Fumarate as a myelin repair therapy in patients with chronic inflammatory injury-causing demyelination as measured by multi-parametric MRI assessments. No reparative therapies exist for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Clemastine fumarate was identified along with a series of other antimuscarinic medications as a potential remyelinating agent using the micropillar screen (BIMA) developed at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). Following in vivo validation, an FDA IND exemption was granted to investigate clemastine for the treatment of multiple sclerosis in the context of chronic optic neuropathy. That pilot study was recently completed and is the first randomized control trial documenting efficacy for a putative remyelinating agent for the treatment of MS. The preselected primary efficacy endpoint (visual evoked potential) was met and a strong trend to benefit was seen for the principal secondary endpoint assessing function (low contrast visual acuity). That trial number was 13-11577. This study seeks to follow up on that study and examine clemastine fumarate's protective and reparative effects in the context of chronic demyelinating brain lesions as imaged by multi-parametric MRI assessments. The investigators will be assessing the effects of clemastine fumarate as a remyelinating therapy and assessing its effect on MRI metrics of chronic lesions found in patients with a confirmed diagnosis of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. In addition to using conventional multi-parametric MRI assessments, this study will also evaluate a new MRI technique called Ultrashort Echo Time (UTE) MRI to assess the effects of clemastine fumarate as a remyelinating therapy of chronic lesions found in patients with a confirmed diagnosis of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and compare it to the other assessments.
Treatments capable of remyelination are a major unmet need for multiple sclerosis and other diseases that involve myelin damage, loss, or dysfunction in the central nervous system (CNS). Chronic demyelination of axons is believed to be injurious to neurons and serves as a major contributor to irreversible cell loss that underlies permanent disability. Available MS treatments are primarily immunosuppressing, without directly addressing or fully preventing axonal degeneration and disability. Clemastine fumarate was identified along with a series of other antimuscarinic medications as a potential remyelinating agent using the micropillar screen (BIMA) developed at UCSF. The screen demonstrated that clemastine promoted the differentiation of the endogenous oligodendrocyte precursor cells (OPCs) into mature myelinating oligodendrocytes. Following in vivo validation, an FDA investigational new drug (IND) exemption was granted to investigate clemastine for the treatment of multiple sclerosis in the context of chronic optic neuropathy. That pilot study was recently completed and is the first randomized control trial documenting efficacy for a putative remyelinating agent for the treatment of MS. The preselected primary efficacy endpoint (visual evoked potential) was met and a strong trend to benefit was seen for the principal secondary endpoint assessing function (low contrast visual acuity). That trial number was 13-11577. This clinical trial is intended to assess magnetic resonance imaging evidence of remyelination using Clemastine Fumarate in patients with chronic demyelinated lesions. Specifically speaking, the primary objective will assess various multi-parametric MRI sequences on the corpus callosum region, a region that animal models studies identified as a promising candidate for assessing remyelination. The aim was to help define the potential for MRI in measuring remyelination in MS, determine the optimal sequences and location for measuring myelin recovery, and help guide trial design for future remyelinating trials. Finally, the study is designed to assess tolerability and clinical efficacy of Clemastine using outcomes intended to assess for (a) adverse events and (b) recovery of myelin.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE
Enrollment
74
8 mg Clemastine tablet. Clemastine fumarate was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (seasonal allergies) in 1977 and was approved for over-the-counter marketing in 1992. Clemastine is not FDA approved as a remyelinating therapy
Matched sugar tablet
Sandler Neurosciences Building, Neurological Clinical Research Unit
San Francisco, California, United States
RECRUITINGCorpus Callosum Myelin Water Fraction
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the myelin water fraction (MWF) (measured in %) from magnetic resonance imaging of the corpus callosum.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Corpus Callosum Myelin Water Fraction at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the myelin water fraction (MWF) (measured in %) from magnetic resonance imaging of the corpus callosum. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Corpus Callosum Myelin Water Fraction at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the myelin water fraction (MWF) (measured in %) from magnetic resonance imaging of the corpus callosum. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Corpus Callosum T1 Relaxation Time
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at shortening the T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) within the corpus callosum using T1 mapping protocols in an MRI.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Corpus Callosum T1 Relaxation Time at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at shortening the T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) within the corpus callosum using T1 mapping protocols in an MRI. Change = (3-month time - Baseline time)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Corpus Callosum T1 Relaxation Time at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at shortening the T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) within the corpus callosum using T1 mapping protocols in an MRI. Change = (6-month time - Baseline time)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Corpus Callosum UTE Fraction
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the ultrashort echo time (UTE) fraction (measured in %) derived from magnetic resonance imaging of the corpus callosum.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Corpus Callosum UTE Fraction at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the ultrashort echo time (UTE) fraction (measured in %) derived from magnetic resonance imaging of the corpus callosum. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Corpus Callosum UTE Fraction at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the ultrashort echo time (UTE) fraction (measured in %) derived from magnetic resonance imaging of the corpus callosum. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Optic Radiation Myelin Water Fraction
The efficacy of Clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the MWF (measured in %) of the optic radiation.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Optic Radiation Myelin Water Fraction at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the MWF (measured in %) of the optic radiation. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Optic Radiation Myelin Water Fraction at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the MWF (measured in %) of the optic radiation. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Corticospinal Tract Myelin Water Fraction
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the MWF (measured in %) of the corticospinal tract.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Corticospinal Tract Myelin Water Fraction at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the MWF (measured in %) of the corticospinal tract. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Corticospinal Tract Myelin Water Fraction at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the MWF (measured in %) of the corticospinal tract. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Optic Radiation T1 Relaxation time
To evaluate the efficacy of Clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) of the optic radiation.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Optic Radiation T1 Relaxation Time at 3 Months
To evaluate the efficacy of Clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) of the optic radiation. Change = (3-month time - Baseline time)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Optic Radiation T1 Relaxation Time at 6 Months
To evaluate the efficacy of Clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) of the optic radiation. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Corticospinal Tract T1 Relaxation Time
To evaluate the efficacy of Clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) of the corticospinal tract.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Corticospinal T1 Relaxation Time at 3 Months
To evaluate the efficacy of Clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) of the corticospinal tract. Change = (3-month time - Baseline time)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Corticospinal Tract T1 Relaxation Time at 6 Months
To evaluate the efficacy of Clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) of the corticospinal tract. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Optic radiation UTE Fraction
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the UTE fraction (measured in %) of the optic radiation.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Optic radiation UTE Fraction at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the UTE fraction (measured in %) of the optic radiation. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Optic radiation UTE Fraction at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the UTE fraction (measured in %) of the optic radiation. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Corticospinal Tract UTE Fraction
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the UTE fraction (measured in %) of the corticospinal tract.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Corticospinal Tract UTE Fraction at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the UTE fraction (measured in %) of the corticospinal tract. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Corticospinal Tract UTE Fraction at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the UTE fraction (measured in %) of the corticospinal tract. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Lesion of interest (LOI) MWF
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing MWF (measured in %) of the lesion(s) of interest, stratified based on enhancement status on prior MRIs.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in LOI MWF at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing MWF (measured in %) of the lesion(s) of interest, stratified based on enhancement status on prior MRIs. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in LOI MWF at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing MWF (measured in %) of the lesion(s) of interest, stratified based on enhancement status on prior MRIs. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
LOI T1 Relaxation Time
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) of the lesion(s) of interest, stratified based on enhancement status on prior MRIs.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in LOI T1 Relaxation Time at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) of the lesion(s) of interest, stratified based on enhancement status on prior MRIs. Change = (3-month time - Baseline time)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in LOI T1 Relaxation Time at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) of the lesion(s) of interest, stratified based on enhancement status on prior MRIs. Change = (6-month time - Baseline time)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
LOI UTE Fraction
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing UTE fraction (measured in %) of the lesion(s) of interest, stratified based on enhancement status on prior MRIs.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in LOI UTE Fraction at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing UTE fraction (measured in %) of the lesion(s) of interest, stratified based on enhancement status on prior MRIs. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in LOI UTE Fraction at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing UTE fraction (measured in %) of the lesion(s) of interest, stratified based on enhancement status on prior MRIs. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Whole Brain MWF
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing MWF (measured in %) across the whole-brain divided into regions of normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), cortical gray matter, and deep gray matter.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Whole Brain MWF at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing MWF (measured in %) across the whole-brain divided into regions of normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), cortical gray matter, and deep gray matter. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Whole Brain MWF at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing MWF (measured in %) values across the whole-brain divided into regions of normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), cortical gray matter, and deep gray matter. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Whole Brain T1 Relaxation Time
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) across the whole-brain divided into regions of normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), cortical gray matter, and deep gray matter.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Whole Brain T1 Relaxation Time at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) across the whole-brain divided into regions of normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), cortical gray matter, and deep gray matter. Change = (3-month time - Baseline time)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Whole Brain T1 Relaxation Time at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing T1 relaxation time (measured in seconds) across the whole-brain divided into regions of normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), cortical gray matter, and deep gray matter. Change = (6-month time - Baseline time)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Whole Brain UTE Fraction
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the UTE fraction (measured in %) across the whole-brain divided into regions of normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), cortical gray matter, and deep gray matter.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Whole Brain UTE Values at 3 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the UTE fraction (measured in %) across the whole-brain divided into regions of normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), cortical gray matter, and deep gray matter. Change = (3-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Whole Brain UTE Values at 6 Months
The efficacy of clemastine relative to placebo at increasing the UTE fraction (measured in %) across the whole-brain divided into regions of normal-appearing white matter (NAWM), cortical gray matter, and deep gray matter. Change = (6-month % - Baseline %)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Clemastine Tolerability
The tolerability of Clemastine in this population. This will include a special focus with regards to fatigue as this is a major symptom for patients suffering from multiple sclerosis.
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Change from Baseline in Clemastine Tolerability at 3 Months
The tolerability of Clemastine in this population. This will include a special focus with regards to fatigue as this is a major symptom for patients suffering from multiple sclerosis. Change = (3-month tolerability - Baseline tolerability)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 3-month visits.
Change from Baseline in Clemastine Tolerability at 6 Months
The tolerability of Clemastine in this population. This will include a special focus with regards to fatigue as this is a major symptom for patients suffering from multiple sclerosis. Change = (6-month tolerability - Baseline tolerability)
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline and 6-month visits.
Informative Outcomes
Which secondary or tertiary outcomes are likely to be informative for future remyelinating trials in optic neuritis (and other related indications).
Time frame: This will be assessed at the baseline visit.
Informative Outcomes at 3 Months
Which secondary or tertiary outcomes are likely to be informative for future remyelinating trials in optic neuritis (and other related indications).
Time frame: This will be assessed at the 3-month visit.
Informative Outcomes at 6 Months
Which secondary or tertiary outcomes are likely to be informative for future remyelinating trials in optic neuritis (and other related indications).
Time frame: This will be assessed at the 6-month visit.