Mavoglurant in adolescents with fragile X syndrome: analysis of Clinical Global Impression-Improvement source data from a double-blind therapeutic study followed by an open-label, long-term extension study

Table 3 Distribution of responders in broad improvement categories across the treatment arms (double-blind core study)

	Placebo	Mavoglurant			x ²	d.f.	p value^a
	Placebo	25 mg	50 mg	100 mg	x ²	d.f.	p value^a
Anxiety
Number of responders	4	4	4	4	0.13/3.38	1/3	0.72/0.33
Expected number of responders	4.6	2.3	4.6	4.6	0.13/3.38	1/3	0.72/0.33
Behavior and mood
Number of responders	6	3	5	7	0.13/1.29	1/3	0.72/0.73
Expected number of responders	6	3	6	6	0.13/1.29	1/3	0.72/0.73
Communication
Number of responders	4	3	5	7	1.95/2.68	1/3	0.16/0.44
Expected number of responders	5.4	2.7	5.4	5.4	1.95/2.68	1/3	0.16/0.44
Cognitive/academic
Number of responders	3	2	1	5	0.31/4.26	1/3	0.58/0.24
Expected number of responders	3.1	1.6	3.1	3.1	0.31/4.26	1/3	0.58/0.24
Engagement
Number of responders	6	2	5	8	1.19/4.50	1/3	0.28/0.21
Expected number of responders	6	3	6	6	1.19/4.50	1/3	0.28/0.21
Functional skills
Number of responders	3	1	1	4	0.08/2.68	1/3	0.77/0.44
Expected number of responders	2.6	1.3	2.6	2.6	0.08/2.68	1/3	0.77/0.44

Note: Expected number of responders is calculated under the assumption of equal response probabilities across treatments
^aCMH test for equal response probabilities across treatments; total number of responders = 28; x ² = chi-squared test statistic; d.f. = degrees of freedom; first x ², d.f., and p value for trend, second for heterogeneity

ISSN: 1866-1955