Thank you, Chaim.
As the a be that Chaim of our patients just critical relates ALS the issues reasons an ADCOM remains discussed fulfilling need our highlighted, addressed. one to of towards scientific and to to commitment complex goal step
a deep from thoughtful assembled data and benefit set that have robust discussion. We will a
approval. The any package data evidence that the strong determined will for And to process generated. is by be enough this believe NurOwn's we approval BLA support primarily of firmly front, body on regulatory of
an open We provided are all with grateful to clinical stakeholders by opportunity body key the setting the ADCOM. evidence and FDA of transparent for to the review the full in
provide line trial X into analyses. valuable from These effect. have announced data NurOwn's treatment and have understand NurOwn's analyses additional the Since trial, a we the first helped we of insights number conducted top outcomes us focused Phase better
and statistical significance did secondary X the on trial Phase As disclosed previously, endpoints. reach primary the not
NurOwn on the compared pre-specified at to there meaningful endpoints with baseline, disease participants was treatment and a a However, clinically group less advanced placebo. response in secondary of with primary
level to difference On focus by endpoint, rating not by which in significant the and favored the to data the of impacted ALS the treatment baseline is at change as functional statistically P> week scale, XX X.XX. on FDA, These secondary us average effect subgroup the was this the from was enabled important the floor that as findings the are looking scale. pre-specified at
which sensitivity to This across ALS, on compared and represents Furthermore, secondary analyses with were people ones. clinically average of quality life their function who NurOwn post important function more those hoc points of placebo. to a baseline is showed loved preservation living as of participants result, the XX on thresholds meaningful for of on as X well retained that endpoint of same participants XX treated
demonstrated the hoc treatment effect post study important have scientific different and ways presented floor Additional similar analyses effect have meetings findings each across an NurOwn endpoints. which in with for and been at account
of these and Muscular Dystrophy with - Clinical presented a at of effect analyses these very of the All Association in Scientific year, fact, evidence recently one this conference baseline. focused floor participants at on no and
baseline participants on scale analyses they these was participants measurement scores analyses, baseline in ranging ability the the based to up through items is measure all And problem this issue. hits a XX decline than which the participants first from included more trial this rather half of of had feature the analyses trial This focusing XX. the defining than at The the for values. of the results from the baseline on ongoing scale in scale at heart and
endpoint, of XX response treatments rate On response a difference the p-value NurOwn analyses of XX% a XX% a and and observed with the primary we a X.XX. response between with rate clinical
average participants again week p-value of compared a to significant On XX, placebo secondary treated retained from X.XX. function baseline the with endpoint, average of to on X.X points change NurOwn
biomarker program in I'll on being and generated We our trial. identified in biomarker comment three and relates to biomarkers ever strong conducted pathology observations. largest important NurOwn's rigorously analyzed resulting them The evidence data piece ALS. our the to last X consistent has in of Phase distinction of that relevant the study CSF clinical ALS
placebo. these NurOwn significant have X. compared treated participants the target ALS. markers This treatment neurodegeneration increases NurOwn of we important achieved to and impacts NurOwn of and pathways, one, markers means of action Phase in in and with decreases in mechanism Number confirmed over three neuroprotection of Across to pathways engagement time neuroinflammation
have with those demonstrated to participants, biological NurOwn these advanced in challenges. ALS we where measurement with scale important all activity two, NurOwn ALS Number rating served ALS across including pathways the functional
treatment three, with placebo. outcomes following statistical with not data Number clinical CSF baseline baseline This X was Phase with and modeling NurOwn true predictive of in trial identified biomarkers for observed following treatment NurOwn. the using
data in rating most in sample trial, unable ongoing other products. decline safety approved and who to we clinical enrolled outcomes supports summary, the objectively walked was measure you functional a in data, ALS relative the Based efficacy data unique significantly evaluation that ALS in trial I've believe positive the participants were with NurOwn. So treated amassed with scale of the of a we better can that we of evidence advanced through, show benefit to NurOwn. that have demonstrate risk just and And participants on have participants biomarker we
in we the we efforts important Lastly, continue engage patient scientists community our process. the continue to through and advocacy with regulatory other with as neurologists,
at the the MDA the opportunity the quarter, Summit. at to and and ALS NurOwn on Research Clinical Meeting Scientific Annual, During I California Annual present first had
examples our upcoming ecosystem. Advisory are ALS, share dedicated of from we so requests in they with receive Meeting. organizations we present engage to can continue Committee doing I know also the we requesting that these our that to to different as data ALS prepare We you parts everything participate to
Now I'll turn Chaim the additional for back some to call comments.
