Pharmacotherapeutic group: Immunosuppressants, complement inhibitors, ATC code: L04AJ06
Mechanism of action
Zilucoplan is a 15 amino acid, synthetic macrocyclic peptide that inhibits the effects of the complement protein C5 through a dual mechanism of action. It specifically binds to C5, thereby inhibiting its cleavage by the C5 convertase to C5a and C5b, which results in a downregulation of the assembly and cytolytic activity of the membrane attack complex (MAC). Additionally, by binding to the C5b moiety of C5, zilucoplan sterically hinders binding of C5b to C6, which prevents the subsequent assembly and activity of the MAC, should any C5b be formed.
Pharmacodynamic effects
The pharmacodynamic effect of zilucoplan was analysed through the ability of inhibiting ex vivo, complement‑induced sheep red blood cell (sRBC) lysis.
Data from the phase 2 and phase 3 studies demonstrate rapid, complete (> 95%) and sustained complement inhibition with zilucoplan when dosed according to Table 1.
Clinical efficacy and safety
The safety and efficacy of zilucoplan were evaluated in a 12‑week multicentre, randomised, double‑blind placebo‑controlled study MG0010 (RAISE) and the open‑label extension study MG0011 (RAISE‑XT).
Study MG0010 (RAISE)
A total of 174 patients were enrolled, who were at least 18 years of age, had acetylcholine‑receptor antibody positive generalised myasthenia gravis, a Myasthenia Gravis-Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) Score of ≥ 6 and a Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG Score) of ≥ 12 (see Table 3).
Patients were treated once daily with either zilucoplan (dosed according to Table 1) or placebo with 86 and 88 patients randomised to each treatment group, respectively. Stable standard of care (SOC) therapy was allowed. The majority of patients received treatment for gMG at baseline which included parasympathomimetics (84.5%), systemic corticosteroids (63.2%) and nonsteroidal immunosuppressants (51.1%).
The primary endpoint was the change from baseline to week 12 in MG-ADL total score.
Key secondary endpoints were the change from baseline to week 12 in QMG total score, in Myasthenia Gravis Composite (MGC) total score and in MG Quality of Life (MG‑QoL15r) total score (Table 4).
MG-ADL clinical responders were defined as having at least a 3-point decrease and QMG responders were defined as having at least a 5-point decrease without rescue therapy.
Table 3: Baseline demographic and disease characteristics of patients enrolled in study MG0010
| | Zilucoplan (n=86) | Placebo (n=88) |
| Age, years, mean (SD) | 52.6 (14.6) | 53.3 (15.7) |
| Age at onset, years, mean (SD) | 43.5 (17.4) | 44.0 (18.7) |
| Age ≥ 65 | 22 (25.6) | 26 (29.5) |
| Gender, male, n (%) | 34 (39.5) | 41 (46.6) |
| Baseline MG‑ADL score mean (SD) | 10.3 (2.5) | 10.9 (3.4) |
| Baseline QMG score mean (SD) | 18.7 (3.6) | 19.4 (4.5) |
| Baseline MGC score, mean (SD) | 20.1 (6.0) | 21.6 (7.2) |
| Baseline MG‑QoL 15r score, mean (SD) | 18.6 (6.6) | 18.9 (6.8) |
| Duration of disease, years, mean (SD) | 9.3 (9.5) | 9.0 (10.4) |
| MGFA class at screening, n (%) Class II | 22 (25.6) | 27 (30.7) |
| MGFA class at screening, n (%) Class III | 60 (69.8) | 57 (64.8) |
| MGFA class at screening, n (%) Class IV | 4 (4.7) | 4 (4.5) |
Table 4 presents the change from baseline at week 12 in the total scores for MG‑ADL, QMG, MGC and MGQoL15r. Mean baseline scores were 10.9 and 10.3 for MG-ADL, 19.4 and 18.7 for QMG, 21.6 and 20.1 for MGC and 18.9 and 18.6 for MG-QoL15r for placebo and zilucoplan groups, respectively.
Table 4: Change from baseline at week 12 in total scores for MG‑ADL, QMG, MGC and MG‑QoL15r
| Endpoints: Change from baseline in total score at week 12: LS Mean (95% CI) | Zilucoplan (n=86) | Placebo (n=88) | Zilucoplan change LS mean difference vs. placebo (95% CI) | p‑value* |
| MG‑ADL | -4.39 (-5.28, -3.50) | -2.30 (-3.17, -1.43) | -2.09 (-3.24, -0.95) | < 0.001 |
| QMG | -6.19 (-7.29, -5.08) | -3.25 (-4.32, -2.17) | -2.94 (-4.39, -1.49) | < 0.001 |
| MGC | -8.62 (-10.22, -7.01) | -5.42 (-6.98, -3.86) | -3.20 (-5.24, -1.16) | 0.0023 |
| MG‑QoL15r | -5.65 (-7.17, -4.12) | -3.16 (-4.65, -1.67) | -2.49 (-4.45, -0.54) | 0.0128 |
*Analysis based on a MMRM ANCOVA model
The treatment effect in the zilucoplan group for all 4 endpoints started rapidly at week 1, further increased to week 4 and was sustained through week 12.
At week 12, a clinically meaningful and highly statistically significant improvement in MG-ADL total score (Figure 1) and in QMG total score was observed for zilucoplan versus placebo.
Figure 1: Change from baseline in MG‑ADL total score

Analysis based on MMRM ANCOVA model
Clinically meaningful change = 2‑point change in MG‑ADL score
At week 12, 73.1% of the patients in the zilucoplan group were MG‑ADL clinical responders without rescue therapy, vs. 46.1% in the placebo group (p<0.001). Fifty-eight percent (58.0%) of the patients in the zilucoplan group were QMG clinical responders without rescue therapy, vs. 33.0% in the placebo group (p=0.0012).
At week 12, the cumulative portion of patients that needed rescue therapy was 5% in the zilucoplan group and 11% in the placebo group. Rescue therapy was defined as intravenous immunoglobulin G (IVIG) or plasma exchange (PLEX).
Study MG0011 (RAISE‑XT)
Two hundred patients who completed a placebo‑controlled phase 2 study (MG0009) or the phase 3 study (MG0010) continued in the open‑label extension study MG0011 in which all patients received zilucoplan (dosed according to Table 1) daily. Primary objective was long-term safety. Secondary efficacy endpoints were change from double-blind study baseline in MG‑ADL, QMG, MGC and MG‑QoL15r score at week 24. For former MG0010 participants, results are shown below (Table 5).
Table 5: Mean change from double-blind study baseline (MG0010) to week 24 (week 12 in MG0011) and week 60 (week 48 in MG0011) in total scores for MG‑ADL, QMG, MGC and MG‑QoL15r
| Endpoints: Change from baseline in total score at week 24 and week 60: LS Mean (SE) | Zilucoplan (n=82) | Placebo/zilucoplan (n=84) |
| MG-ADL | |
| Week 24 | -5.46 (0.59) | -5.20 (0.52) |
| Week 60 | -5.16 (0.61) | -4.37 (0.54) |
| QMG | |
| Week 24 | -7.10 (0.80) | -7.19 (0.69) |
| Week 60 | -6.44 (0.83) | -6.15 (0.71) |
| MGC | |
| Week 24 | -10.37 (1.15) | -11.12 (1.00) |
| Week 60 | -8.89 (1.20) | -9.01 (1.04) |
| MG-QoL15r | |
| Week 24 | -8.09 (0.96) | -7.96 (0.89) |
| Week 60 | -7.22 (0.99) | -6.09 (0.91) |
Analysis based on a MMRM ANCOVA model where rescue therapy and discontinuation are imputed as treatment failure; Death are imputed the worst possible score (e.g. score 24 for MG-ADL).
SE = Standard error
Figure 2: Mean change from double-blind study baseline to week 60 for total MG-ADL score

Immunogenicity
In MG0010 and MG0011 (RAISE-XT), the patients were tested for anti-drug antibody (ADA) positivity and anti‑polyethylene glycol (PEG) antibody positivity.
In both studies, antibody titres were low and there was no evidence of an impact on pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics and no clinically meaningful impact on efficacy or safety.
In MG0010 and MG0011, 2 patients (2.4%) each in the zilucoplan/zilucoplan and placebo/zilucoplan group were positive for treatment emergent ADA and anti-PEG antibodies. Thirteen subjects (16%) per arm were treatment emergent anti-PEG antibody positive while ADA negative. Two patients (2.4%) per arm were anti-PEG negative while treatment emergent ADA positive.
Paediatric population
The licensing authority has deferred the obligation to submit the results of studies with zilucoplan in one or more subsets of the paediatric population in the treatment of myasthenia gravis. See section 4.2 for information on paediatric use.