About this trial
The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of fenfluramine hydrochloride (HCl) versus placebo in study participants with Rett syndrome (RTT).
Eligibility criteria
This trial does not accept healthy volunteersQualifiers
Participant has typical or classic Rett Syndrome (RTT) according to the RettSearch Consortium 2010 revised criteria
Participant has a documented disease-causing mutation or deletion in the methyl-CpG-binding protein 2 (MECP2) gene
No loss or degradation of ambulation (including gait, coordination, or independence of walking/standing);
No loss or degradation of hand function; no loss or degradation of speech (including babbling, words, or previously developed communicative vocalizations);
Disqualifiers
Participant has a history of lymphoma, leukemia, or any malignancy within the past 5 years except for basal cell or squamous epithelial carcinomas of the skin that have been resected with no evidence of metastatic disease for 3 years.
Participant has clinically significant abnormality in vital signs according to the Investigator
Greater than trace aortic valve regurgitation.
Greater than mild mitral valve regurgitation.
Trial design
Parallel
Treatments tested in this trial
fenfluramine hydrochloride
DrugOral solution
Placebo
Other interventionOral solution
Treatment groups
Trial outcomes
Primary outcomes
Change from Baseline to Week 14 in Rett Syndrome Behaviour Questionnaire (RSBQ) Total Score
The RSBQ is a caregiver-completed, instrument assessing behavioral and emotional features in RTT. The RSBQ consists of 45 items, including 8 subscales: General mood (8 items); Breathing problems (5 items); Hand behavior (6 items); Face movements (4 items); Body rocking and expressionless face (6 items); Nighttime behaviors (3 items); Fear/anxiety (4 items); and Walking/standing (2 items). Caregivers are asked to evaluate each RTT feature based on the current status of the patients on a 3-point scale as 0 ("not true"), 1 ("somewhat or sometimes true"), or 2 ("often true"), with the total score ranging from 0 to 90. Higher scores indicate increased disease severity. Seven items that do not belong under any of the subscales are classed as "uncategorized" but contribute to the overall total score.
Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) Score at Week 14
The CGIC is a clinician-rated single item evaluating the degree of improvement or worsening of a participant's condition from Baseline following treatment or intervention. The CGIC uses a 7-point response scale, with the following ratings: "1: Very Much improved", "2: Much improved", "3: Minimally improved", "4: No change", "5: Minimally worse", "6: Much worse", "7: Very Much Worse".
Secondary outcomes
Change from Baseline to Week 14 in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Sleep Disturbance (PROMIS-SD) score
Sleep disturbances will be assessed by the PROMIS-SD parent proxy 8a version. Caregivers are asked to rate 8 items over the past 7 days on a 5-point scale: "1: Never", "2: Almost never", "3: Sometimes", "4: Almost always", and "5: Always", with higher scores indicating more severe sleep disturbances.
Change from Baseline to Week 14 in Observer-Reported Communication Ability (ORCA) score
The ORCA is an 84-item, observer-reported measure of communication ability over the past 30 days. The majority of the items included in the ORCA measure have 3 response options: "No or only once," "Sometimes," and "Yes, almost all the time", which enable derivation of an overall communication score and scores for each form of communication (expressive, receptive, and pragmatic), with higher scores indicating greater communication ability.
Caregiver Global Impression of Change - Seizure (CaGIC-Seizure) score at Week 14
The CaGIC-Seizure is a caregiver-reported item assessing the change from Baseline in the participant's seizure status. The CaGIC-Seizure uses a 7-point response scale, with the following ratings: "1: Very Much improved", "2: Much improved", "3: Minimally improved", "4: No change", "5: Minimally worse", "6: Much worse", "7: Very Much Worse".
Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) during the double-blind intervention period
An AE is any untoward medical occurrence in a clinical study participant temporally associated with the use of study intervention, whether or not considered related to the study intervention. Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are adverse events that are not present prior to the pharmaceutical product administration or an already present event that worsens either in intensity or frequency.
Sponsors and contacts
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.