Figure 1
Figure 1. Patient disposition. † indicates that a patient could have multiple reasons for screening failure. ‡, The primary efficacy end point was assessed using the full analysis set. §, Five patients from Egypt and 1 patient from Italy. ‖AEs that led to discontinuation were abdominal pain (2), arthritis (1), drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (1), and pruritus (1). ¶, Four patients had mT2* <6 ms at baseline, and 1 patient had mT2* of 6.1 ms at study entry. ††, Last available value within month 12 window included in efficacy analysis, with exception of month 12 mT2* where LOCF was used. ‡‡, Two patients were measured within the month 24 window and were included in efficacy analyses, but failed to complete the full 24 months.

Patient disposition. † indicates that a patient could have multiple reasons for screening failure. ‡, The primary efficacy end point was assessed using the full analysis set. §, Five patients from Egypt and 1 patient from Italy. ‖AEs that led to discontinuation were abdominal pain (2), arthritis (1), drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (1), and pruritus (1). ¶, Four patients had mT2* <6 ms at baseline, and 1 patient had mT2* of 6.1 ms at study entry. ††, Last available value within month 12 window included in efficacy analysis, with exception of month 12 mT2* where LOCF was used. ‡‡, Two patients were measured within the month 24 window and were included in efficacy analyses, but failed to complete the full 24 months.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal