
FDA and EMA Accepts Regulatory Applications for Cemdisiran in Generalized Myasthenia Gravis
Key Takeaways
- FDA and EMA accepted cemdisiran applications for AChR+ gMG, positioning it as a potential first-in-class siRNA and first quarterly subcutaneous complement-targeting option in this setting.
- In NIMBLE, MG-ADL improved by –4.5 vs –2.2 with placebo at week 24 (placebo-adjusted –2.3; P<.001), with onset by week 2 and no between-dose waning.
The FDA has accepted Regeneron Pharmaceuticals’ new drug application of cemdisiran's for generalized myasthenia gravis under priority review, with a target action date of November 2026.
Both the FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) have accepted regulatory applications for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals’ cemdisiran, an investigational small interfering RNA (siRNA) for the treatment of adult patients with anti-acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibody–positive generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG). If approved, cemdisiran would represent the first siRNA agent indicated for gMG and the first complement-targeting treatment available via subcutaneous quarterly dosing in this population.1
The FDA accepted the company’s new drug application for cemdisiran under priority review following the use of a priority review voucher, with a PDUFA target action date of November 2026. In addition, the EMA has accepted the Marketing Authorization Application; a decision from the European Commission is anticipated in the second half of 2027. The company also noted that a regulatory submission in Japan is planned for early 2027.
“Generalized myasthenia gravis is a chronic debilitating disease with unpredictable symptoms that impact daily life. While current therapies have managed disease activity, there remains an unmet need for options that achieve rapid and sustained efficacy with reduced treatment burden,”
Phase 3 NIMBLE Trial
The applications are supported by data from the
At week 24, patients treated with cemdisiran experienced a least squares mean reduction of 4.5 points in MG-ADL total score compared with 2.2 points in the placebo group, corresponding to a placebo-adjusted difference of –2.3 points (P <.001). In addition, a greater proportion of patients receiving cemdisiran achieved clinically meaningful improvement (≥3-point reduction) versus placebo (76.6% vs 44.1%). Improvements were observed as early as 2 weeks and were sustained through the study period, with no apparent waning of effect between doses.
Similarly, cemdisiran demonstrated superiority on QMG, with a mean reduction of 4.2 points compared with 1.5 points for placebo (difference, –2.8; P =.002). Nearly half of treated patients (48.4%) achieved a 5-point or greater improvement versus 19% in the placebo group. These data were published simultaneously in The Lancet and presented at the
READ MORE:
The overall safety profile of cemdisiran appeared comparable to placebo during the double-blind treatment period. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 69.2% of patients receiving cemdisiran and 77.1% of those receiving placebo. Common AEs included upper respiratory tract infection, headache, urinary tract infection, and nasopharyngitis, with most events being mild to moderate in severity.
Rates of infection were numerically lower in the cemdisiran group (27%) compared with placebo (40%), and no meningococcal infections or deaths were reported during the double-blind phase. One death because of pneumonia occurred during the extension period in a patient receiving cemdisiran with significant comorbidities and concomitant immunosuppressive therapy.4
At AAN 2026, Vu, who also serves as the division director of Neuromuscular Medicine EMG Laboratories, spoke with NeurologyLive® to further outline the rationale and findings from the phase 3 NIMBLE trial. Unlike currently available C5 inhibitors that directly target the C5 molecule, he noted that cemdisiran works by preventing the hepatic production of C5, representing a distinct approach to complement inhibition. According to Vu, cemdisiran alone demonstrated meaningful efficacy, whereas the addition of pozelimab did not provide incremental benefit. He also discussed the therapy’s safety profile, noting limited liver-related concerns and mild hypersensitivity events during the randomized controlled period.
















