Data in Early RMS: ENLIGHTEN Study
ZEPOSIA was evaluated in 2 pivotal trials, SUNBEAM (1 year; N=1346) and RADIANCE (2 years; N=1313) that were multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active treatment-controlled studies of daily oral ozanimod 0.46 mg (not approved for maintenance dose) or 0.92 mg oral daily dose vs weekly Avonex (interferon beta-1a), 30-μg intramuscular injection. Please see study results below.1-3
ENLIGHTEN: A Post-Marketing Study Focused on Patients With Early RMS4
An open-label, single-arm, phase 3b study that evaluated treatment with ZEPOSIA 0.92 mg in participants with early RMS over 3 years4a
Primary endpoint4
- Clinically meaningful increase in SDMT scoreb
Key secondary endpoints4
- ARR
- MRI lesions
- Brain volume loss
- Adverse events
Key baseline
characteristics (N=188)4
- 71% DMT naïve
- 1.0 year post-diagnosis
(mean) - 2.0 median EDSS
- 79% female
- Mean age 39.5 years
Mia was not a participant in the ENLIGHTEN study. She is a real ZEPOSIA patient who was compensated for her time. Individual results may vary.
Endpoints were analyzed descriptively.4
Trial inclusion criteria4a
- Aged 18-65 years at screening
- Diagnosis of MS per the 2010 or 2017 revised McDonald criteria within the last 5 years
- ≤1 MS disease-modifying therapy (none within 1 month of enrollment)
- EDSS score of ≤3.5 at screening
- No relapses within 30 days before screening
- ≤10 GdE lesions on baseline brain MRI scan
- No history of developmental disorders or motor or sensory defects that could interfere with cognitive test performance
a |
The database lock was June 20, 2025. SDMT, relapse evaluation, MRI, physical examination, ECG, and lab analyses were evaluated at 12 months, 24 months, and 36 months. Bristol Myers Squibb closed the ENLIGHTEN study early for strategic business-related reasons unrelated to safety and efficacy, which resulted in a smaller sample size at Year 3 than initially planned.4 |
b |
The proportion of participants with an increase in SDMT score of ≥4 points or ≥10% from baseline to Year 3. The SDMT pairs a series of symbols with digits, and participants must match the appropriate symbol to the paired numerical digit using a key; the SDMT was administered verbally in ENLIGHTEN. Scoring is based on the correct number of responses given in 90 seconds, with higher scores indicating faster cognitive processing speed.4 |
ZEPOSIA pivotal trials SUNBEAM (1 year; N=1346) and RADIANCE (2 years; N=1313). Primary endpoint: ZEPOSIA reduced ARR vs Avonex by 48% at 1 year (0.181 vs 0.350, respectively) and by 38% at 2 years (0.172 vs 0.276, respectively). Secondary endpoints: ZEPOSIA reduced the number of new or enlarging T2 lesions by 48% at 1 year and by 42% at 2 years, and reduced the number of GdE lesions vs Avonex by 63% at 1 year and 53% at 2 years. 9 of 10 patients showed no confirmed 3-month disability progression. There was no significant difference in 3-month confirmed disability between ZEPOSIA and Avonex.1-3,5
ARR=annualized relapse rate; DMT=disease-modifying therapy; ECG=electrocardiogram; EDSS=Expanded Disability Status Scale; GdE=gadolinium enhancing; MRI=magnetic resonance imaging; MS=multiple sclerosis; RMS=relapsing multiple sclerosis; SDMT=Symbol Digit Modalities Test.
Cognitive Processing Speed (SDMT) at 3 Years4
Categorical Analysis of Clinically Meaningful Change in SDMT Relative to Baseline From the ENLIGHTEN Trial
88%
Improved or Remained Stable in SDMT Scores at 3 Yearsa
The Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) assesses cognitive processing speed.4
In ENLIGHTEN, an SDMT score change of ≥ 4points, or ≥ 10% from baseline, was consideredclinically meaningful.4
Endpoints were analyzed descriptively.4c
Total population who received ZEPOSIA 0.92 mg: Year 1 (n=168), Year 2 (n=149), Year 3 (n=104).4
c |
This SDMT category represents unadjusted data. Improved: at least a 4-point or 10% increase in SDMT relative to baseline; stable: change from baseline SDMT between -4 and 4 points and percentage change between -10% and 10%; worsened: at least a 4-point or 10% decrease in SDMT relative to baseline.4 |
Secondary Endpoints: ARR, Lesions, and WBV at 3 Years4
GdE Lesions |
Patients who were lesion-free |
98%f |
Change in GdE lesion count from baselined |
-0.6g |
|
T2 Lesions |
Adjusted mean number of new/enlarging lesions per scan |
0.32g |
WBV |
Mean change in WBV from prior year |
-0.31h |
Mean change in WBV remained consistent |
Endpoints were analyzed descriptively.4
Patients who were GdE lesion-free: 93% at Year 1 (n=151) and 95% at Year 2 (n=131); GdE lesion count change from baseline: -0.5 at Year 1 (n=161) and -0.6 at Year 2 (n=137). Adjusted mean number of new/enlarging T2 lesions per scan: 0.57 at Year 1 (n=161) and 0.45 at Year 2 (n=137).4
d |
Based on a negative binomial model that adjusted for age at baseline, the number of relapses in the previous 2 years prior to enrollment, and baseline number of GdE lesions; the natural log transformation of treatment duration was included as an offset term to account for participants’ varying durations of time in the treatment period.4 |
e |
n=188.4 |
f |
n=84.4 |
g |
n=85.4 |
h |
n=68.4 |
i |
Year 1 to Year 2 (n=127); Year 2 to Year 3 (n=68).4 |
ARR=annualized relapse rate; GdE=gadolinium enhancing; WBV=whole brain volume.
Adverse Events Reported at 3 Years4
Summary of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) |
ZEPOSIA |
Any TEAE |
84% |
Serious TEAEsj |
9% |
TEAEs in ≥5% of Patients |
ZEPOSIA |
COVID-19k |
27% |
Fatigue |
12% |
Headache |
12% |
Nasopharyngitis |
12% |
Urinary tract infection |
12% |
Upper respiratory tract infection |
11% |
Muscle spasms |
9% |
Sinusitis |
9% |
Arthralgia |
7% |
Hypoesthesia |
7% |
Paresthesia |
7% |
Hypertension |
7% |
Insomnia |
7% |
Pain in extremity |
6% |
The safety profile for patients with early RMS is generally similar to that observed in pivotal trials1-4
3.7%
Discontinuation rate due to AEs4
j |
The following serious TEAE-preferred terms were reported in 1 participant (0.5%) each: COVID-19, pneumonia, and sepsis (all reported in the same participant), appendicitis, diverticulitis, urinary tract infection, papillary thyroid cancer, squamous cell carcinoma, goiter, hyponatremia, suicidal ideation, angina pectoris, pneumothorax, abdominal pain, abdominal pain lower, small intestinal obstruction, bile duct stone, ecchymosis, back pain, ectopic pregnancy, breast hyperplasia, and hemorrhagic ovarian cyst.4 |
k |
The COVID-19 pandemic began at the start of the trial.4 |
ZEPOSIA pivotal trials SUNBEAM (1 year; N=1346) and RADIANCE (2 years; N=1313) adverse reactions:
Overall incidence of adverse reactions for ZEPOSIA vs Avonex at 1 year was 59.8% and 75.5%, respectively, and at 2 years was 74.7% and 83.0%, respectively. Across 2 head-to-head trials, the most common adverse reactions with an incidence of at least 2% in patients treated with ZEPOSIA and at least 1% greater than Avonex, respectively, were as follows: upper respiratory infection, 26% (vs 23%); hepatic transaminase elevation, 10% (vs 5%); orthostatic hypotension, 4% (vs 3%); urinary tract infection, 4% (vs 3%); back pain, 4% (vs 3%); hypertension, 4% (vs 2%); and upper abdominal pain, 2% (vs 1%). Data are not an adequate basis for comparison of rates between ZEPOSIA and the active control. Upper respiratory infection includes nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection, pharyngitis, respiratory tract infection, bronchitis, rhinitis, viral respiratory tract infection, viral upper respiratory tract infection, rhinorrhea, tracheitis, and laryngitis. Hepatic transaminase elevation includes alanine aminotransferase increased, gamma-glutamyl transferase increased, aspartate aminotransferase increased, hepatic enzyme increased, liver function test abnormal, and transaminase increased. Hypertension includes hypertension, essential hypertension, and orthostatic hypertension. Severe adverse reactions: the rate of severe adverse reactions at 1 year for ZEPOSIA was 1.6% vs 2.2% for Avonex, and the rate at 2 years for ZEPOSIA was 3.5% vs 4.3% for Avonex. Serious adverse reactions: the rate of serious adverse reactions at 1 year for ZEPOSIA was 2.9% vs 2.5% for Avonex, and the rate at 2 years for ZEPOSIA was 6.5% vs 6.4% for Avonex. Please see the full Prescribing Information for additional SUNBEAM and RADIANCE data.1-3
AE=adverse event; TEAE=treatment-emergent adverse event.
Explore the efficacy data
Explore the safety profile
References:
- Zeposia. Prescribing Information. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; 2024.
- Comi G, Kappos L, Selmaj KW, et al; SUNBEAM Study Investigators. Safety and efficacy of ozanimod versus interferon beta-1a in relapsing multiple sclerosis (SUNBEAM): a multicentre, randomised, minimum 12-month, phase 3 trial. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(11): 1009-1020 and Suppl 1-26.
- Cohen JA, Comi G, Selmaj KW, et al; RADIANCE Trial Investigators. Safety and efficacy of ozanimod versus interferon beta-1a in relapsing multiple sclerosis (RADIANCE): a multicentre, randomised, 24-month, phase 3 trial. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(11):1021-1033 and Suppl 1-31.
- Naismith RT, Zivadinov R, Morrow SA, et al. Safety and efficacy of ozanimod over 1 year in patients with early relapsing multiple sclerosis: an interim analysis of the ENLIGHTEN study. Presented at the 9th Joint ECTRIMS-ACTRIMS Meeting; October 11–13, 2023; Milan, Italy. Poster P690.
- Data on file. BMS-REF-OZA-0098. Princeton, NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; 2025.