Andecaliximab (GS-5745): A Comprehensive Monograph on a Selective MMP9 Inhibitor from Oncology and Inflammation to Rare Bone Disorders

Section 1: Executive Summary

Andecaliximab, also known by its development code GS-5745, is an investigational recombinant chimeric IgG4 monoclonal antibody engineered for high-affinity, selective inhibition of matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP9).[1] Initially developed by Gilead Sciences, the therapeutic was positioned as a promising agent for a broad spectrum of diseases, including advanced cancers and chronic inflammatory conditions, based on the pathological upregulation of its target in these settings.[2] Early-phase clinical trials in oncology, particularly in combination with chemotherapy for gastric and pancreatic cancers, showed encouraging signals of antitumor activity, prompting advancement into large-scale pivotal studies.[3]

However, the extensive clinical development program ultimately met with significant setbacks. The cornerstone Phase III GAMMA-1 trial, which evaluated Andecaliximab with mFOLFOX6 chemotherapy in first-line gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma, failed to meet its primary endpoint of improving overall survival.[3] Concurrently, development programs in inflammatory diseases were discontinued following definitive evidence of futility. A combined Phase II/III study in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis was terminated after an interim analysis revealed a complete lack of efficacy, a result mirrored in a parallel Phase II trial for Crohn's disease.[2] These failures, despite consistent evidence of robust target engagement, suggested a fundamental flaw in the therapeutic hypothesis that MMP9 was a critical, non-redundant driver of these complex, multifactorial diseases.

Following these results, the asset underwent a critical strategic pivot. Development rights were transferred from Gilead Sciences to āshibio, Inc., which repositioned Andecaliximab for the treatment of rare bone disorders characterized by heterotopic ossification (HO)—the abnormal formation of bone in soft tissues.[10] This strategic shift was underpinned by a stronger, more direct scientific rationale, including human genetic evidence suggesting a causal role for MMP9 in the pathophysiology of Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva (FOP), an ultra-rare genetic disorder that causes progressive HO.[11]

Currently, Andecaliximab is being actively investigated in this new therapeutic area. The ANDECAL trial, a global Phase 2/3 study, is evaluating its efficacy and safety in patients with FOP.[12] A second study, the Phase 1/2 ANDECA-HO trial, is assessing its potential in preventing HO in patients following traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI).[14] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted Andecaliximab an Orphan Drug Designation for the treatment of FOP, acknowledging the significant unmet need in this patient population.[16] The future of Andecaliximab now rests on its ability to demonstrate clinical efficacy in these niche indications, where its well-characterized safety profile and more targeted biological rationale may provide a viable path to approval.

Section 2: Molecular Profile and Mechanism of Action

2.1 Structure and Physicochemical Properties

Andecaliximab is a biological therapeutic, classified as a recombinant chimeric (mouse/human) monoclonal antibody of the immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) isotype with a kappa light chain.[1] As a chimeric antibody, its variable regions, which confer target specificity, are of murine origin, while its constant regions are human, a design intended to reduce immunogenicity compared to fully murine antibodies. The molecule was further engineered to remove T-cell epitopes, a sophisticated approach to mitigate the risk of generating anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) and improve its long-term safety and efficacy profile.[2]

The antibody has a chemical formula of  and a calculated molar mass of approximately 143,933.81 g/mol, consistent with a typical IgG molecule.[5] Its complex three-dimensional structure is stabilized by an extensive network of sixteen disulfide bridges, both within and between its two heavy chains and two light chains, which is critical for its structural integrity and biological function.[20]

Table 1: Key Identifiers and Physicochemical Properties of Andecaliximab

Parameter	Value	Source(s)
Drug Name	Andecaliximab	5
Development Code	GS-5745	5
DrugBank ID	DB17564	User Query
Type	Biotech, Monoclonal Antibody	User Query5
CAS Number	1518996-49-0	5
Class	Antineoplastics, Antiulcers, MMP9 Inhibitors	10
Originator	Gilead Sciences, Inc.	10
Active Developer	āshibio, Inc.	11
Chemical Formula		5
Molar Mass	143,933.81 g/mol	5

2.2 The Matrix Metalloproteinase-9 (MMP9) Target

The biological target of Andecaliximab is matrix metalloproteinase-9, also known as gelatinase B, a zinc-dependent endopeptidase.[2] MMP9 plays a fundamental role in tissue remodeling by degrading components of the extracellular matrix (ECM), most notably type IV and V collagens, which are key constituents of basement membranes.[2] Under normal physiological conditions, MMP9 is involved in essential processes such as embryonic development, wound healing, angiogenesis, bone development, and the migration of immune cells.[2] Like most MMPs, it is secreted as an inactive zymogen (pro-MMP9) that requires proteolytic cleavage for activation.[2]

The rationale for developing an MMP9 inhibitor stemmed from extensive evidence implicating its dysregulation in a wide range of pathologies. In oncology, elevated MMP9 expression by tumor cells and infiltrating immune cells (e.g., macrophages, neutrophils) is strongly associated with tumor growth, invasion, neovascularization, and metastasis.[3] In gastric cancer, for instance, high MMP9 levels are a negative prognostic indicator, correlated with shorter overall and disease-free survival.[3] Similarly, in chronic inflammatory diseases such as ulcerative colitis, MMP9 expression and activity are significantly increased in the inflamed intestinal mucosa, and fecal MMP9 concentrations directly correlate with clinical and endoscopic disease activity scores, suggesting a role in tissue destruction and perpetuation of the inflammatory response.[2] More recently, MMP9 has been implicated in the inflammatory processes that trigger heterotopic ossification, where its role in degrading matrix proteins is thought to contribute to the pathological cascade of abnormal bone formation.[12]

2.3 Inhibitory Mechanism

Andecaliximab employs a sophisticated and highly specific mechanism of inhibition that distinguishes it from earlier generations of MMP inhibitors. Instead of competing with substrates at the enzyme's zinc-containing active site, Andecaliximab binds to a unique epitope located at the junction between the propeptide domain and the catalytic domain of MMP9.[2] By binding to this distal site, the antibody physically prevents the conformational changes and proteolytic cleavage necessary to remove the propeptide, thereby locking the enzyme in its inactive zymogen state.[2] This mechanism of action classifies Andecaliximab as a non-competitive, allosteric inhibitor.[2]

A defining feature of Andecaliximab is its high degree of selectivity. It demonstrates high-affinity binding to MMP9 with minimal cross-reactivity to other MMP family members, including MMP-2, which shares significant structural homology.[1] This specificity was a deliberate design choice to overcome the primary limitation of first-generation, broad-spectrum pan-MMP inhibitors like marimastat. These earlier drugs failed in clinical trials due to severe, dose-limiting off-target toxicities, most notably a debilitating musculoskeletal syndrome.[1] By selectively targeting only MMP9, Andecaliximab was designed to maintain a favorable safety profile, a goal that was largely achieved throughout its clinical development.

However, this rational design choice highlights a central challenge in drug development. The very selectivity that endowed Andecaliximab with a superior safety profile may have also been a primary contributor to its lack of efficacy in complex diseases. Biological systems, particularly the tumor microenvironment, are characterized by significant redundancy. It is plausible that upon the effective inhibition of MMP9, tumor cells and stromal components could compensate by upregulating the activity of other proteases, such as MMP-2 or MMP-14, which can perform similar ECM-degrading functions.[26] Therefore, while blocking a single, specific node in the pathological network was safer, it may have been insufficient to halt the overall disease process, which could reroute through alternative pathways. The failure of Andecaliximab in oncology suggests that a highly selective therapeutic approach may be inadequate in a biologically complex and redundant system, pointing to a potential disconnect between an elegant molecular design and the multifactorial nature of the targeted disease.

Section 3: Clinical Pharmacology Profile

3.1 Pharmacokinetics (PK)

The pharmacokinetic profile of Andecaliximab has been characterized in multiple Phase I studies across various patient populations, revealing dose-dependent disposition characteristic of monoclonal antibodies that bind their target with high affinity.[6]

At lower intravenous doses, such as 200 mg administered every two weeks (q2w), Andecaliximab exhibited non-linear pharmacokinetics consistent with target-mediated drug disposition (TMDD).[6] In this state, a substantial fraction of the administered antibody is cleared from circulation by binding to its target, MMP9. This binding-dependent clearance pathway is saturable. As doses were escalated to 600 mg and 1800 mg, the MMP9 target became saturated, and the clearance mechanism shifted from TMDD to conventional, non-saturable elimination pathways. This resulted in linear pharmacokinetics, where exposure (as measured by area under the curve, AUC) increases proportionally with the dose.[6]

Specific PK parameters were elucidated in a Phase Ib study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving 400 mg infusions. The median terminal half-life () was determined to be 5.65 days, and the mean volume of distribution at steady state was 4560 mL, indicating that the drug is primarily distributed within the plasma and interstitial fluid compartments, as expected for a large molecule like an IgG antibody.[29] The study also observed moderate drug accumulation with repeat q2w dosing, with mean plasma exposure increasing from 587 d·µg/mL on day 1 to 878 d·µg/mL on day 29.[29]

Based on these comprehensive PK and target engagement data, a dose of 800 mg q2w was selected for subsequent Phase II and III trials in oncology.[1] This dose was rationally chosen because it was expected to achieve plasma concentrations well within the linear PK range, ensuring predictable exposure, and to maintain steady-state trough concentrations sufficient to continuously saturate circulating MMP9, thereby maximizing the potential pharmacodynamic effect.[1]

3.2 Pharmacodynamics (PD) and Target Engagement

The primary pharmacodynamic measure for Andecaliximab was its ability to engage and neutralize its target, MMP9, in the systemic circulation. Across numerous clinical trials, the drug demonstrated robust and maximal target engagement. The key biomarker used was the concentration of free (unbound) MMP9 in plasma, measured using a qualified ELISA.[28] At therapeutic doses (e.g., 800 mg q2w), Andecaliximab consistently reduced plasma levels of free MMP9 to below the lower limit of quantification, achieving what was defined as maximal target binding.[6] This effect was rapid and sustained; in the RA study, a mean MMP9 coverage (percentage of total plasma MMP9 bound by the antibody) of approximately 80% was achieved and maintained after the very first infusion.[29]

Despite this unequivocal evidence of target engagement in the periphery, the effect on downstream biological processes was less clear. In a study of patients with pancreatic cancer, investigators explored whether inhibiting circulating MMP9 would modulate levels of peripheral cleaved collagens, a potential surrogate for MMP9 activity within the tumor microenvironment. The results were inconsistent; while cleaved collagen levels were elevated in patients at baseline, they were not consistently modulated by Andecaliximab treatment and showed no association with clinical response or progression-free survival.[1] In the same study, biomarkers of tumor burden such as CA-125 and CA-50 did decrease with treatment, but this effect was more likely attributable to the potent cytotoxic effects of the co-administered gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy rather than a direct effect of Andecaliximab.[1]

This body of evidence presents a classic paradox in modern drug development: the divergence of pharmacological success from clinical efficacy. The PK/PD data confirm that Andecaliximab performed its intended molecular function with remarkable efficiency, achieving complete and sustained neutralization of its circulating target. Its subsequent failures in large-scale clinical trials for cancer and inflammatory diseases cannot be attributed to inadequate dosing, poor exposure, or failed target engagement. The drug effectively "hit its target." The inescapable conclusion is that the therapeutic hypothesis itself was flawed. For complex, multifactorial diseases like gastric cancer and ulcerative colitis, MMP9, despite its upregulation, does not appear to be a critical, non-redundant driver of pathology. This journey serves as a powerful illustration that achieving perfect pharmacodynamic target modulation is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for clinical success and underscores the supreme importance of rigorous target validation in the early stages of drug discovery.

Section 4: Clinical Development Program Part I: Oncology

The initial development strategy for Andecaliximab focused heavily on its potential as an anti-cancer agent, leveraging the strong preclinical rationale linking MMP9 to tumor progression and metastasis. The program explored its use in several solid tumors, with the most advanced investigations in gastric/GEJ and pancreatic adenocarcinomas.

4.1 Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction (GEJ) Adenocarcinoma

The development in gastric and GEJ cancer followed a trajectory from initial promise in early-phase trials to definitive failure in a large-scale pivotal study.

Phase I/Ib (NCT01803282) - The Initial Promise

The first indication of clinical potential emerged from a Phase I/Ib study evaluating Andecaliximab as monotherapy and in combination with the mFOLFOX6 chemotherapy regimen.[3] The monotherapy dose-escalation part established a recommended dose of 800 mg q2w, which was found to be safe and achieved full target engagement.[6] In the combination cohort of 40 patients with advanced HER2-negative gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma, the results were highly encouraging. For the 36 first-line patients, the combination of Andecaliximab and mFOLFOX6 yielded a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 9.9 months and an overall response rate (ORR) of 50%.[6] These outcomes compared favorably to historical data for mFOLFOX6 alone and provided a strong rationale to advance the drug into a confirmatory Phase III trial.[3]

Phase III GAMMA-1 (NCT02545504) - The Definitive Failure

The GAMMA-1 study was a large, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trial designed to definitively assess the efficacy and safety of adding Andecaliximab to mFOLFOX6 as a first-line treatment for patients with untreated, HER2-negative advanced gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma.[3] Between 2015 and 2017, 432 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either Andecaliximab (800 mg q2w) plus mFOLFOX6 or placebo plus mFOLFOX6.[3]

The trial failed to meet its primary endpoint. The addition of Andecaliximab did not result in a statistically significant improvement in overall survival (OS). The median OS was 12.5 months in the Andecaliximab arm compared to 11.8 months in the placebo arm (Hazard Ratio 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.18; ).[3] The secondary endpoint of PFS also showed no significant benefit, with a median PFS of 7.5 months for the Andecaliximab group versus 7.1 months for the placebo group (HR 0.84; 95% CI, 0.67 to 1.04; ).[3] Although the ORR was numerically higher in the investigational arm (51% vs. 41%), the result was of borderline statistical significance () and could not compensate for the failure of the primary and key secondary survival endpoints.[3] The safety profile was comparable between the two groups, with no new or unexpected toxicities observed.[3]

Phase II with Nivolumab (NCT02864381) - Exploring Immunotherapy Combinations

Based on preclinical data suggesting MMP9 inhibition could enhance T-cell infiltration and potentiate checkpoint blockade, a randomized, open-label Phase II study was conducted to evaluate Andecaliximab in combination with the anti-PD-1 antibody nivolumab.[24] The trial enrolled 144 patients with pretreated metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma, randomizing them to receive Andecaliximab plus nivolumab or nivolumab alone.[32] The combination failed to demonstrate any synergistic effect. The primary endpoint of ORR was not improved (10% for the combination vs. 7% for nivolumab alone; ).[32] No benefit was observed in PFS or OS, indicating that MMP9 inhibition does not enhance the efficacy of PD-1 blockade in this patient population.[32]

4.2 Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC)

Andecaliximab was also evaluated in a cohort of patients with advanced PDAC as part of a Phase II study, where it was combined with the standard-of-care chemotherapy regimen of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel.[1] In this single-arm study, the combination appeared to be well-tolerated and demonstrated promising clinical activity. The study reported an ORR of 44% and a median PFS of 7.8 months.[1] These results were notably higher than historical benchmarks for gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel alone, which in a pivotal Phase III trial showed an ORR of 23% and a median PFS of 5.5 months.[1] Despite these encouraging findings, development in pancreatic cancer was not advanced to a Phase III trial, a decision likely influenced by the negative outcome of the much larger and more definitive GAMMA-1 trial in gastric cancer, which cast significant doubt on the overall viability of the MMP9 inhibition strategy in gastrointestinal cancers.

The stark contrast between the promising 9.9-month median PFS observed in the small, single-arm Phase I/Ib gastric cancer cohort and the 7.5-month median PFS in the large, randomized Phase III trial serves as a powerful case study in translational failure. Early-phase, non-randomized trials are susceptible to various biases, including patient selection, that can inflate efficacy signals. The more rigorous, controlled design of the Phase III trial eliminated these confounders and revealed the true, modest effect of the drug, which was not statistically or clinically significant. This discrepancy underscores the inherent risks of making major investment and development decisions based on uncontrolled early-phase data and highlights the critical importance of randomized evidence in confirming therapeutic benefit.

Table 2: Summary of Key Clinical Trials in Oncology

Indication	Trial ID (NCT)	Phase	Design	Combination Agent	Key Endpoints	Summary of Results	Source(s)
Gastric/GEJ Adenocarcinoma	NCT01803282	I/Ib	Open-label, dose-escalation and expansion	mFOLFOX6	Safety, PK, PD, ORR, PFS	Encouraging activity in first-line patients: median PFS 9.9 months, ORR 50%. Provided rationale for Phase III.	3
Gastric/GEJ Adenocarcinoma	NCT02545504 (GAMMA-1)	III	Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled	mFOLFOX6	Primary: OS. Secondary: PFS, ORR, Safety.	Failed to meet primary endpoint. No significant improvement in OS (12.5 vs 11.8 mo; p=0.56) or PFS (7.5 vs 7.1 mo; p=0.10).	3
Gastric/GEJ Adenocarcinoma	NCT02864381	II	Randomized, open-label	Nivolumab	Primary: ORR. Secondary: PFS, OS, Safety.	Failed to improve efficacy over nivolumab alone. ORR was 10% vs 7% (p=0.8). No benefit in PFS or OS.	32
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma	Part of NCT01803282	II	Open-label, single-arm cohort	Gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel	Safety, ORR, PFS	Promising activity: ORR 44%, median PFS 7.8 months. Development did not proceed to Phase III.	1

Section 5: Clinical Development Program Part II: Inflammatory Disorders

Contemporaneous with its oncology program, Gilead Sciences pursued a broad development strategy for Andecaliximab in several chronic inflammatory diseases, predicated on the role of MMP9 in tissue degradation and immune cell trafficking in these conditions. However, this entire arm of the development program was ultimately discontinued due to a consistent lack of clinical efficacy across all tested indications.

5.1 Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD)

The most advanced investigations in inflammatory disorders were in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD), where preclinical data strongly supported MMP9 as a therapeutic target.

Ulcerative Colitis (UC)

A combined Phase 2/3 trial was initiated to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Andecaliximab for inducing and maintaining remission in patients with moderate-to-severe UC.[2] Patients were randomized to receive subcutaneous injections of Andecaliximab 150 mg every two weeks (Q2W), 150 mg weekly (QW), or placebo.[8] The study was designed with a pre-specified interim futility analysis after the first 150 patients completed an 8-week induction period. This analysis led to the early termination of the trial due to a profound lack of efficacy.[2]

The results of the 8-week induction phase were unequivocal. There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint, defined as clinical remission, between the treatment arms. Remission rates were 7.3% in the placebo group, 7.4% in the Andecaliximab Q2W group, and 1.8% in the Andecaliximab QW group.[8] Similarly, no benefits were observed for any secondary endpoints, including Mayo Clinic Score response, endoscopic response, or histological mucosal healing.[8]

Crohn's Disease (CD)

In parallel, a Phase II, randomized, placebo-controlled study (NCT02405442) evaluated Andecaliximab in 187 patients with moderately to severely active CD.[9] Patients received subcutaneous placebo or Andecaliximab at doses of 150 mg Q2W, 150 mg QW, or 300 mg QW for 8 weeks.[9] Similar to the UC trial, this study also failed to demonstrate any clinical benefit. The proportions of patients achieving the co-primary endpoints of clinical response and endoscopic response were not different between any of the Andecaliximab groups and the placebo group.[9] It was the clear negative result from this CD study that prompted an unplanned interim analysis of the UC trial, which confirmed the lack of efficacy and led to the termination of the IBD program.[37]

5.2 Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and Other Conditions

Development was also pursued in rheumatoid arthritis, another chronic inflammatory condition where MMP9 is implicated in joint destruction.

A small, double-blind, Phase Ib study was conducted in 18 patients with active RA.[29] The primary objective was to assess safety. Patients received three intravenous infusions of 400 mg Andecaliximab or placebo over 29 days. The drug was found to be generally safe and well-tolerated, with all adverse events being mild or moderate (Grade 1 or 2) in severity.[29] Following this, a Phase II trial (NCT02862574) was initiated to evaluate Andecaliximab as an add-on therapy for RA patients on a TNF inhibitor and methotrexate regimen, but this study was subsequently terminated.[39] While the specific reasons were not published, the termination is consistent with the broad pattern of futility observed in other inflammatory indications.

Furthermore, early-stage clinical programs for Andecaliximab in other conditions, including a Phase I trial in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) (NCT02077465) and a Phase II trial in Cystic Fibrosis (NCT02759562), were also discontinued, effectively ending all of Gilead's development efforts in the inflammation space.[10]

The consistent and definitive failure of Andecaliximab across three distinct, major inflammatory diseases—UC, CD, and RA—provides compelling evidence for a revised understanding of MMP9's role in these conditions. While MMP9 levels are undeniably elevated and correlate with disease activity, its inhibition confers no clinical benefit. This strongly suggests that MMP9 is not a critical, rate-limiting driver of the underlying pathology. Instead, it is more likely a downstream consequence or a biomarker of the inflammatory cascade, an effect rather than a cause. Its presence is a sign of the ongoing inflammation, but its activity is either not essential for perpetuating the disease or is functionally redundant, with other inflammatory mediators able to compensate for its inhibition. This outcome represents a crucial lesson in target validation for inflammatory diseases.

Table 3: Summary of Terminated Clinical Trials in Inflammatory Diseases

Indication	Trial ID (NCT)	Phase	Design	Key Endpoints	Reason for Discontinuation	Source(s)
Ulcerative Colitis	N/A	II/III	Randomized, placebo-controlled	Clinical Remission, Endoscopic Response	Lack of efficacy at planned interim futility analysis.	2
Crohn's Disease	NCT02405442	II	Randomized, placebo-controlled	Clinical Response, Endoscopic Response	Lack of efficacy. Prompted termination of the UC trial.	9
Rheumatoid Arthritis	NCT02862574	II	Randomized, placebo-controlled	Efficacy and Safety	Terminated; likely due to broad lack of efficacy in other inflammatory indications.	39
COPD	NCT02077465	I	Randomized, placebo-controlled	Safety, Tolerability, PK	Completed, but program discontinued.	10
Cystic Fibrosis	NCT02759562	II	Randomized, placebo-controlled	Effect on FEV1	Terminated; program discontinued.	10

Section 6: A Strategic Pivot: The Repositioning of Andecaliximab for Rare Bone Disorders

Following the widespread failures in oncology and inflammation, Andecaliximab was effectively shelved by Gilead Sciences. However, the asset was given a new life through a strategic transfer to āshibio, Inc., a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on severe bone and connective tissue disorders.[10] This move represents a classic pharmaceutical life-cycle management strategy: repositioning a drug with a well-established and favorable safety profile into a new therapeutic area where the scientific rationale for its mechanism of action is stronger and more direct.

6.1 Scientific Rationale for Targeting MMP9 in Heterotopic Ossification (HO)

The repositioning of Andecaliximab for disorders of heterotopic ossification is founded on a much more compelling biological premise than its previous indications. The link between MMP9 and HO is supported by evidence that MMP9 is highly expressed in HO lesions and is believed to promote the pathological bone formation by degrading matrix proteins in areas of inflammation, a known trigger for HO after trauma such as spinal cord injury.[15]

Most critically, the rationale is anchored by powerful human genetic data. Researchers identified a unique patient with FOP who exhibited an unusually mild disease course. Genetic analysis revealed that this individual carried not only the FOP-causing ACVR1 mutation but also a second, naturally occurring loss-of-function mutation in the MMP9 gene.[11] This finding strongly suggests that reduced MMP9 activity has a protective, disease-modifying effect in FOP, providing a causal link that was absent in the correlational data for cancer and IBD. In a monogenic disease like FOP, targeting a single, genetically validated modifier like MMP9 presents a far more plausible path to therapeutic success than in complex, polygenic diseases.

6.2 The ANDECAL Trial in Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva (FOP) (NCT06508021)

Leveraging this strong rationale, āshibio initiated the ANDECAL trial, a pivotal study for Andecaliximab in FOP.[11]

Trial Design

The ANDECAL study is a global, Phase 2/3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a two-part structure designed to rigorously evaluate the drug in pediatric and adult patients with FOP.[12]

• Part 1 (Lead-in Study): This initial part, conducted in the U.S. with up to 12 participants aged 12 and older, is designed to assess safety, PK/PD, and preliminary efficacy signals. It is further divided into Part 1a, which uses Na18F PET/CT imaging to assess metabolic activity in HO lesions, and Part 1b, which focuses on patients with a history of frequent flare-ups.[12] Participants in Part 1 receive one of two active dose levels of Andecaliximab for 13 weeks.[12]
• Part 2 (Main Study): This larger component will enroll approximately 80 participants who will be randomized to receive one of two dose levels of Andecaliximab or a placebo for 52 weeks. Following this period, all participants, including those on placebo, can transition to an open-label extension where they will receive active treatment.[12] The study design incorporates a plan for age step-down, allowing for the inclusion of younger children (ages 6-12 and then 2-6) once safety is established in the adolescent population.[12]

Endpoints

The trial is designed to measure clinically meaningful outcomes for FOP patients.[12]

• Primary/Key Efficacy Endpoint: The central measure of efficacy is the number and volume of new HO lesions, which will be assessed using low-dose whole-body computed tomography (WBCT-LH) at specified intervals.[13]
• Other Key Endpoints: The study will also evaluate the effect of Andecaliximab on the number and severity of disease flare-ups, changes in joint function (assessed by the Cumulative Analog Joint Involvement Scale, CAJIS), quality of life, safety, PK/PD, and the development of anti-drug antibodies.[13]

6.3 The ANDECA-HO Trial in Spinal Cord Injury (NCT07024407)

To explore the potential of Andecaliximab in non-genetic forms of HO, āshibio initiated the ANDECA-HO trial.[11]

Trial Design and Endpoints

This is a Phase 1/2, open-label, proof-of-concept study enrolling up to 10 adult participants who have sustained a recent traumatic spinal cord injury and are at high risk of developing HO.[14] The primary objectives of this initial study are to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics (i.e., MMP9 target engagement) of Andecaliximab in this specific patient population.[14] The efficacy of Andecaliximab in preventing or reducing the formation of new HO, as measured by radiographic studies, is included as an exploratory endpoint.[14] This study is intended to provide the foundational data needed to support the design of future, larger randomized trials in non-hereditary HO.[15]

6.4 Competitive and Therapeutic Context

Andecaliximab enters a rapidly evolving therapeutic landscape for FOP and HO, where there is a significant unmet need but also emerging competition.

FOP Landscape

The standard of care for FOP has historically been supportive, focusing on symptom management and avoiding trauma.[47] In 2023, the FDA approved the first-ever treatment for FOP, Palovarotene (Sohonos), an oral retinoic acid receptor γ (RARγ) agonist.[47] While it has demonstrated efficacy in reducing the volume of new HO, its utility is limited by significant safety concerns, most notably a black box warning for irreversible premature epiphyseal closure in growing children, which severely restricts its use in the pediatric population.[50]

Several other investigational agents are also in late-stage development:

• Garetosmab (Regeneron): A monoclonal antibody that neutralizes Activin A, a key signaling protein in the FOP pathway. In a Phase 3 trial, Garetosmab demonstrated a profound efficacy signal, reducing the formation of new HO lesions by over 90% compared to placebo.[53] This result sets an extremely high efficacy bar for any new therapy entering the FOP space.
• Saracatinib (AZD0530): An oral small-molecule inhibitor of the ALK2 kinase, the protein product of the mutated ACVR1 gene in FOP. By directly targeting the overactive enzyme, it represents another mechanistically distinct approach and is being evaluated in the STOPFOP clinical trial.[58]

HO Landscape

Management of non-hereditary HO currently relies on a combination of physical therapy, prophylactic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), bisphosphonates, and, in severe cases, radiation therapy and surgical resection of the ectopic bone.[61] These options have significant limitations and do not address the underlying biological drivers of the condition, leaving a substantial unmet need for an effective and safe preventative therapy.

This competitive environment creates both a challenge and an opportunity for Andecaliximab. The profound efficacy demonstrated by Garetosmab means Andecaliximab will likely need to show a substantial, clinically meaningful reduction in HO to be competitive. However, its most significant advantage may lie in its safety profile. Having been administered to approximately 1,000 individuals across numerous trials with a consistently favorable safety and tolerability record, Andecaliximab could differentiate itself from its competitors.[12] It could emerge as a safer alternative to Palovarotene, particularly for pediatric patients, or as a well-tolerated option for patients who cannot take or do not respond to other therapies. Its ultimate success will depend on its ability to carve out a distinct niche based on a compelling balance of efficacy and safety.

Table 4: Design and Endpoints of Ongoing Trials in Rare Bone Disorders

Trial Name	Trial ID (NCT)	Indication	Phase	Design	Patient Population	Primary/Key Efficacy Endpoint(s)	Sponsor	Source(s)
ANDECAL	NCT06508021	Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva (FOP)	II/III	Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-part study with OLE	~92 pediatric and adult patients (starting ≥12 years) with FOP	Number/volume of new HO lesions as assessed by WBCT-LH.	āshibio, Inc.	12
ANDECA-HO	NCT07024407	Heterotopic Ossification (HO) post-Spinal Cord Injury	I/II	Open-label, single-arm	Up to 10 adult patients (18-89 years) with recent traumatic SCI	Primary: Safety, PK, PD. Exploratory: Efficacy to inhibit new HO.	āshibio, Inc.	14

Section 7: Comprehensive Safety, Tolerability, and Immunogenicity Profile

A key asset of Andecaliximab, and a primary reason for its repositioning into rare diseases, is its extensive and favorable safety and tolerability profile, established across a clinical program involving approximately 1,000 participants.[12]

Integrated Safety Analysis

An integrated analysis of safety data from Phase I, II, and III trials in oncology and inflammatory diseases reveals a consistent and manageable safety profile.

• Common Adverse Events: Across all studies, the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were generally mild to moderate (Grade 1-2) in severity. These included fatigue, nausea, decreased appetite, alopecia, and peripheral edema.[1] In the oncology trials where Andecaliximab was combined with chemotherapy, the safety profile of the combination was not meaningfully different from that of chemotherapy plus placebo, suggesting that Andecaliximab did not add significant toxicity to standard cytotoxic regimens.[1]
• Absence of Key Toxicities: A critical finding from the safety data is the absence of the dose-limiting musculoskeletal syndrome that plagued the first generation of pan-MMP inhibitors.[1] This outcome validates the success of the selective-inhibitor design strategy from a safety perspective, demonstrating that by avoiding off-target inhibition of other MMPs, the hallmark toxicity of the class could be eliminated.
• Serious Adverse Events: While serious adverse events, including deaths, were reported in trials involving patients with advanced, life-threatening cancers, these events were not attributed to treatment with Andecaliximab by study investigators.[6]

Immunogenicity

As a chimeric monoclonal antibody, Andecaliximab has the potential to elicit an immune response, leading to the formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs). The development of ADAs can impact a drug's pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety. To mitigate this risk, Andecaliximab was specifically engineered to remove T-cell epitopes, thereby reducing its immunogenic potential.[2] The assessment of immunogenicity has been a standard component of its clinical trials, including the ongoing ANDECAL study in FOP, which lists the formation of ADAs as a specific outcome measure to be evaluated.[13] The full immunogenicity profile will be better understood upon the publication of results from these long-term studies.

Table 5: Integrated Summary of Common Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)

Adverse Event	Frequency in Andecaliximab Arms (Range across studies)	Frequency in Control Arms (Range across studies)	Notes	Source(s)
Fatigue	75% (PDAC)	Comparable to control	Common AE in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Generally Grade 1-2.	1
Alopecia	56% (PDAC)	Comparable to control	Primarily associated with co-administered chemotherapy.	1
Peripheral Edema	56% (PDAC)	Comparable to control	Generally Grade 1-2.	1
Nausea	50% (PDAC)	Comparable to control	Common AE in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Generally Grade 1-2.	1
Decreased Appetite	Common	Comparable to control	Common AE in cancer patients.	32
Musculoskeletal Syndrome	Not Reported	Not Reported	Absence of this class-specific toxicity is a key safety differentiator.	1

Section 8: Concluding Analysis and Future Outlook

8.1 A Critical Synthesis of a Complex Development Journey

The development history of Andecaliximab offers a compelling and instructive narrative on the complexities of modern drug development. Its journey from a broadly targeted oncology and inflammation candidate to a highly specialized rare disease therapy encapsulates critical lessons about target validation, the value of a clean safety profile, and the strategic repositioning of pharmaceutical assets.

The initial failures of Andecaliximab in gastric cancer and inflammatory bowel disease, despite achieving near-perfect pharmacological target engagement, provide a stark illustration of the crucial distinction between a biological target that is a biomarker of a disease and one that is a causal driver. In these complex, multifactorial conditions, the elevated levels of MMP9 appear to be a consequence of the underlying pathology rather than a critical, non-redundant node that can be modulated to achieve a therapeutic effect. The unequivocal negative results from large, well-controlled trials serve as a powerful cautionary tale for the pharmaceutical industry regarding the paramount importance of rigorous target validation before committing to costly late-stage development.

Conversely, the one consistent success across Andecaliximab's entire program was the validation of its molecular design from a safety perspective. The high selectivity for MMP9 successfully eliminated the off-target musculoskeletal toxicity that doomed its predecessors. This favorable safety profile, demonstrated in approximately 1,000 individuals, became the drug's most valuable attribute, preserving its potential and enabling its second life. A drug with significant intrinsic toxicity would almost certainly have been permanently abandoned following the Phase III failure in gastric cancer.

8.2 Assessment of Future Potential and Recommendations

The repositioning of Andecaliximab into FOP and other HO-related disorders represents a scientifically sound and strategically astute pivot. The therapeutic hypothesis is now supported by human genetic evidence, which provides a much stronger foundation for potential success than the correlational data that underpinned its earlier programs. In a monogenic disease like FOP, targeting a single, genetically validated pathway offers a more direct and plausible mechanism for achieving a disease-modifying effect.

However, the path forward is not without significant challenges. Andecaliximab enters a competitive FOP landscape where the efficacy bar has been set extremely high by Regeneron's Garetosmab, which demonstrated over 90% reduction in new bone formation. For Andecaliximab to succeed, it must not only demonstrate a statistically significant and clinically meaningful effect but also establish a clear and compelling value proposition. Its primary point of differentiation is likely to be its safety and tolerability. A strong outcome would be to demonstrate substantial efficacy (e.g., 50-70% reduction in new HO) combined with a superior safety profile, which could make it a preferred option for certain patient segments, particularly in the pediatric population where the approved therapy, Palovarotene, carries significant risks. Furthermore, the ANDECA-HO trial opens the door to a potentially much larger commercial opportunity in non-hereditary HO, a field with a profound unmet medical need.

In conclusion, Andecaliximab is a scientifically compelling asset that has transitioned from a series of high-profile failures to a more focused and mechanistically plausible development path. Its journey underscores the resilience required in pharmaceutical R&D and the potential value that can be unlocked by strategically repositioning assets with favorable characteristics. The ultimate success of Andecaliximab will be determined by the forthcoming data from the ANDECAL and ANDECA-HO trials. These results will be scrutinized not only for their efficacy but also for how they position the drug within an increasingly competitive and sophisticated therapeutic landscape for rare bone disorders.

Works cited

1. Safety and Efficacy of Andecaliximab (GS‐5745) Plus Gemcitabine and Nab‐Paclitaxel in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Results from a Phase I Study - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7648353/
2. Andecaliximab Overview - Creative Biolabs, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.creativebiolabs.net/andecaliximab-overview.htm
3. Phase III Study to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Andecaliximab ..., accessed October 14, 2025, https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.20.02755
4. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7496223/#:~:text=Andecaliximab%20is%20a%20recombinant%20chimeric,MMP%20inhibition%20in%20the%20past.
5. Andecaliximab - Wikipedia, accessed October 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andecaliximab
6. Andecaliximab/GS-5745 Alone and Combined with mFOLFOX6 in Advanced Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Results from a Phase I Study - PubMed Central, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7496223/
7. Phase III Study to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Andecaliximab With mFOLFOX6 as First-Line Treatment in Patients With Advanced Gastric or GEJ Adenocarcinoma (GAMMA-1) - PubMed, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33577358/
8. (PDF) Andecaliximab [Anti-matrix Metalloproteinase-9] Induction Therapy for Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 2/3 Study in Patients With Moderate to Severe Disease - ResearchGate, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325203901_Andecaliximab_Anti-matrix_Metalloproteinase-9_Induction_Therapy_for_Ulcerative_Colitis_A_Randomised_Double-Blind_Placebo-Controlled_Phase_23_Study_in_Patients_With_Moderate_to_Severe_Disease
9. A Phase 2, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study Evaluating Matrix Metalloproteinase-9 Inhibitor, Andecaliximab, in Patients With Moderately to Severely Active Crohn's Disease - PubMed, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29846530/
10. Andecaliximab - Gilead Sciences - AdisInsight, accessed October 14, 2025, https://adisinsight.springer.com/drugs/800038052
11. Andecaliximab - Drug Targets, Indications, Patents - Synapse, accessed October 14, 2025, https://synapse.patsnap.com/drug/692be8331ada423bbcd51c048b9f582d
12. ANDECAL Trial (andecaliximab) - IFOPA, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.ifopa.org/andecaliximab
13. NCT06508021 | A Study of Andecaliximab in Participants With Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva (FOP) | ClinicalTrials.gov, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06508021?term=AREA%5BConditionSearch%5D(Fibrodysplasia%20ossificans%20progressiva%20OR%20%22fop%22%20OR%20%22%20progressive%20myositis%20ossificans%22%20OR%20%22%20progressive%20ossifying%20myositis%22%20OR%20%22%20stone%20man%20syndrome%22)%20AND%20AREA%5BOverallStatus%5D(NOT_YET_RECRUITING%20OR%20RECRUITING)&rank=5
14. NCT07024407 | A Study of Andecaliximab in People With Spinal Cord Injury at Risk for Bone Growth Outside of the Normal Skeleton. | ClinicalTrials.gov, accessed October 14, 2025, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07024407
15. āshibio Doses First Patient in Phase 1b Trial of Andecaliximab in Patients with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) at Risk of Heterotopic Ossification (HO) - ashibio, accessed October 14, 2025, https://ashibio.com/ashibio-doses-first-patient-in-phase-1b-trial-of-andecaliximab-in-patients-with-spinal-cord-injury-sci-at-risk-of-heterotopic-ossification-ho/
16. Search Orphan Drug Designations and Approvals - FDA, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/opdlisting/oopd/detailedIndex.cfm?cfgridkey=994223
17. CAS 1518996-49-0 Andecaliximab - BOC Sciences, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.bocsci.com/product/andecaliximab-cas-1518996-49-0-460406.html
18. Andecaliximab (Anti-MMP9 Reference Antibody) | CAS 1518996-49-0, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.abmole.com/products/andecaliximab.html
19. Andecaliximab/GS-5745 Alone and Combined with mFOLFOX6 in Advanced Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Results from a Phase I Study - AACR Journals, accessed October 14, 2025, https://aacrjournals.org/clincancerres/article/24/16/3829/277841/Andecaliximab-GS-5745-Alone-and-Combined-with
20. KEGG DRUG: Andecaliximab, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.genome.jp/dbget-bin/www_bget?dr:D11262
21. ANDECALIXIMAB - gsrs, accessed October 14, 2025, https://gsrs.ncats.nih.gov/ginas/app/beta/substances/571045EIM4
22. Andecaliximab: Uses, Interactions, Mechanism of Action | DrugBank Online, accessed October 14, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB17564
23. Pharmacodynamic evaluation of andecaliximab. andecaliximab-free matrix... - ResearchGate, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Pharmacodynamic-evaluation-of-andecaliximab-andecaliximab-free-matrix-metalloproteinase_fig1_357643987
24. Safety and tolerability of andecaliximab as monotherapy and in combination with an anti-PD-1 antibody in Japanese patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: a phase 1b study, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8739432/
25. www.creativebiolabs.net, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.creativebiolabs.net/andecaliximab-overview.htm#:~:text=Andecaliximab%20binds%20MMP9%20at%20the,acts%20as%20an%20allosteric%20inhibitor.
26. andecaliximab (GS-5745) News - LARVOL Sigma, accessed October 14, 2025, https://sigma.larvol.com/product.php?e1=23164&tab=newstrac
27. Andecaliximab/GS-5745 Alone and Combined with mFOLFOX6 in Advanced Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Results from a Phase I Study - PubMed, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29691300/
28. Andecaliximab/GS-5745 alone and combined with mFOLFOX6 in advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: Results from a phase 1 study | Clinical Cancer Research - AACR Journals, accessed October 14, 2025, https://aacrjournals.org/clincancerres/article/doi/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-2469/87409/am/Andecaliximab-GS-5745-alone-and-combined-with
29. Phase 1b Study of the Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Disease-related Outcomes of the Matrix Metalloproteinase-9 Inhibitor Andecaliximab in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis - PubMed, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29287749/
30. Safety and Efficacy of Andecaliximab (GS-5745) Plus Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Results from a Phase I Study - PubMed, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32812320/
31. Phase III Study to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Andecaliximab With mFOLFOX6 as First-Line Treatment in Patients With Advanced Gastric or GEJ Adenocarcinoma (GAMMA-1) - PMC, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8078292/
32. Randomized, open-label, phase 2 study of andecaliximab plus nivolumab versus nivolumab alone in advanced gastric cancer identifies biomarkers associated with survival - PubMed, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34893523/
33. Randomized, open-label, phase 2 study of andecaliximab plus nivolumab versus nivolumab alone in advanced gastric cancer identifies biomarkers associated with survival, accessed October 14, 2025, https://jitc.bmj.com/content/9/12/e003580
34. Andecaliximab [Anti-matrix Metalloproteinase-9] Induction Therapy for Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomised - Oxford Academic, accessed October 14, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/ecco-jcc/article-pdf/12/9/1021/25571656/jjy049.pdf
35. A Phase 2, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study Evaluating ..., accessed October 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6113705/
36. Andecaliximab Terminated Phase 2 Trials for Crohn's Disease (CD) Treatment - DrugBank, accessed October 14, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB17564/clinical_trials?conditions=DBCOND0052193&phase=2&purpose=treatment&status=terminated
37. Lack of Efficacy in Crohn's Disease Prompts Unplanned Interim Analysis and Termination of Study in Ulcerative Colitis - Oxford Academic, accessed October 14, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/ecco-jcc/article-abstract/14/2/282/5731762
38. Phase 1b Study of the Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Disease-Related Outcomes of the Matrix Metalloproteinase-9 Inhibitor Andecaliximab in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis | Request PDF - ResearchGate, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322074674_Phase_1b_Study_of_the_Safety_Pharmacokinetics_and_Disease-Related_Outcomes_of_the_Matrix_Metalloproteinase-9_Inhibitor_Andecaliximab_in_Patients_With_Rheumatoid_Arthritis
39. Rheumatoid Arthritis Terminated Phase 2 Trials for Andecaliximab (DB17564) - DrugBank, accessed October 14, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/indications/DBCOND0027961/clinical_trials/DB17564?phase=2&status=terminated
40. Andecaliximab Terminated Phase 2 Trials for Rheumatoid Arthritis ..., accessed October 14, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB17564/clinical_trials?conditions=DBCOND0027961&phase=2&purpose=treatment&status=terminated
41. Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, COPD Completed Phase 1 Trials for Andecaliximab (DB17564) | DrugBank Online, accessed October 14, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/indications/DBCOND0030705/clinical_trials/DB17564?phase=1&status=completed
42. Cystic Fibrosis Terminated Phase 2 Trials for Andecaliximab (DB17564) | DrugBank Online, accessed October 14, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/indications/DBCOND0000838/clinical_trials/DB17564?phase=2&status=terminated
43. NCT06508021 | A Study of Andecaliximab in Participants With Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva (FOP) | ClinicalTrials.gov, accessed October 14, 2025, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06508021
44. Andecaliximab for Stone Man Syndrome (ANDECAL Trial), accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.withpower.com/trial/andecaliximab-for-stone-man-syndrome-dd4de
45. āshibio Doses First Patient in Phase 1b Trial of Andecaliximab in Patients with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) at Risk of Heterotopic Ossification (HO) - Business Wire, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250610649423/en/shibio-Doses-First-Patient-in-Phase-1b-Trial-of-Andecaliximab-in-Patients-with-Spinal-Cord-Injury-SCI-at-Risk-of-Heterotopic-Ossification-HO
46. āshibio begins dosing in trial of andecaliximab for spinal cord injury, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/news/ashibio-andecaliximab-spinal-cord/
47. Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva | Conditions | UCSF Benioff ..., accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.ucsfbenioffchildrens.org/conditions/fibrodysplasia-ossificans-progressiva
48. Care Considerations and Treatment Guidelines - IFOPA, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.ifopa.org/care_considerations
49. Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva - Symptoms, Causes, Treatment | NORD, accessed October 14, 2025, https://rarediseases.org/rare-diseases/fibrodysplasia-ossificans-progressiva/
50. FOP Overview - SOHONOS® (palovarotene), accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.sohonos.com/hcp/fop-ultra-rare-and-severely-disabling
51. US FDA approves Ipsen's Sohonos™ (palovarotene) capsules, the first and only treatment for people with fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva - United States, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.ipsen.com/us/press-releases/us-fda-approves-ipsens-sohonostm-palovarotene-capsules-the-first-and-only-treatment-for-people-with-fibrodysplasia-ossificans-progressiva/
52. Palovarotene reduces heterotopic ossification in juvenile FOP mice but exhibits pronounced skeletal toxicity | eLife, accessed October 14, 2025, https://elifesciences.org/articles/40814
53. OPTIMA Trial (garetosmab) - IFOPA, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.ifopa.org/regn2477
54. Regeneron Announces Positive Phase 3 Trial in Adults with Ultra-Rare Genetic Disorder Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva (FOP), Demonstrating that Garetosmab Prevents Greater than 99% of Abnormal Bone Formation, accessed October 14, 2025, https://investor.regeneron.com/news-releases/news-release-details/regeneron-announces-positive-phase-3-trial-adults-ultra-rare/
55. A Narrative Review of Phase II and III Clinical Trials for the Pharmacological Treatment of Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva (FOP) - PubMed Central, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12474705/
56. Garetosmab: Uses, Interactions, Mechanism of Action | DrugBank Online, accessed October 14, 2025, https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB16379
57. What is Garetosmab used for? - Patsnap Synapse, accessed October 14, 2025, https://synapse.patsnap.com/article/what-is-garetosmab-used-for
58. STOPFOP Trial (saracatinib) - IFOPA - International Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva Association, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.ifopa.org/saracatinib
59. Saracatinib is an efficacious clinical candidate for fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed October 14, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8119212/
60. STOPFOP | IHI Innovative Health Initiative - European Union, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.ihi.europa.eu/projects-results/project-factsheets/stopfop
61. Heterotopic Ossification: Causes, Symptoms and Treatment, accessed October 14, 2025, https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/22596-heterotopic-ossification
62. Heterotopic Ossification - Craig Hospital, accessed October 14, 2025, https://craighospital.org/resources/heterotopic-ossification
63. Heterotopic Ossification - Physiopedia, accessed October 14, 2025, https://www.physio-pedia.com/Heterotopic_Ossification
64. Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Andecaliximab in Adults With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) | ClinicalTrials.gov, accessed October 14, 2025, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02077465?tab=table
65. Andecaliximab in Participants With Fibrodysplasia Ossificans Progressiva (FOP) - UCSF Clinical Trials, accessed October 14, 2025, https://clinicaltrials.ucsf.edu/trial/NCT06508021