suspension manufactured to mimic Givinostat

Evaluation was performed comparing Dixon Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) before and after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat versus placebo.

The lower limb muscles assessed were: whole thigh, quadriceps, medial thigh, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvic girdle. Please note that statistics data are expressed as: Least Square Means (95% CI) for whole thigh, quadriceps, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvis girdle; while as Log Least Square Means (95% CI) for medial thigh.

Evaluation was performed comparing Dixon MRI findings before and after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat versus placebo.

Dixon technique has advantages in multiple applications for evaluation of musculoskeletal system diseases. It allows more robust fat suppression than do other sequences and can be used in combination with multiple different sequences (GRE and SE) and using different weightings (T1, T2, or proton density).

The lower limb muscles assessed were: whole thigh, quadriceps, medial thigh, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvic girdle (data showed as least square mean)

A summary of mean change in the contractile area of lower limb muscles comparing MRI findings before and after 12 months of treatment in the ITT set is reported. The lower limb muscles considered are the same as the outcome 3. Please note that statistic data are expressed as Least Square Means (95% CI) except for Hamstrings which is expressed as Log Least Square Means.

A summary of the mean change in cross-sectional area (CSA) by type after 12 months of treatment in the ITT set is reported. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as Log Least Square Means (95% CI) for CSA type I fibers, and as Least Square Means (95% CI) for CSA type II fibers and Total CSA.

Evaluation of histologic parameters such as Fiber with nuclear centralizations (%), Total number of fibers (%), and Regenerative fibers (%) were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as log least square mean for Regenerative fibers (%), and total number of fibers (Slides I), while are expressed as least square mean for Fibers with nuclear centralizations (%) and total number of fibers (Slides II and III).

Evaluation of histology parameters such as Muscle Fibers Area [MFA](%), were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. MFA fraction was determined from biopsies using the mean of available fields. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as least square mean.

Evaluation of histology parameters such as Adipose tissue (%) were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as log least square mean.

Evaluation of other histological structures like necrotic cells, vessels and any other nonconnective tissue present in the microscopic field were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. The value is shown as % compared to the arithmetic mean of the two positive control (i.e., healthy subjects) bands present in the same western blot. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as log least square mean.

Evaluation were performed using the MFM32 scale, that is a tool designed for neuromuscular diseases and is applicable to all degrees of disease severity. It was validated in terms of reproducibility, construct validity, and concurrent validity. It consists of 32 items (tasks) classified into three dimensions: D1, standing and transfers; D2, axial and proximal motor capacity; and D3, distal motor capacity. Each item is scored on a four-point Likert scale. The generic grading is measured as follows: 0, cannot initiate the task or cannot maintain the starting position; 1, partially performs the task; 2, performs the task with compensatory movements (position maintained for an insufficient period of time, slowness, uncontrolled movements, etc.); and 3, performs the task fully and 'normally', the movement being controlled, mastered, directed, and performed at a constant speed. The overall total score ranging from 0 (severe functional impairment) to 100 (no functional impairment).

TFT is assessed through 3 different parameters one of which is time to walk/run 10 m. The test was performed with or without orthoses as the patient preferred. He/she was not asked to run, but rather to arrive at the finish line as soon as possible leaving him the choice on how to do so. The assessor walked alongside the patient for safety but couldn't help her/him in any way. The walk/run speed was calculated as 10/time in seconds taken to run/walk 10 m. The test was graded as follows:

1. Unable to walk independently.
2. Unable to walk independently but can walk with full leg calipers (KAFOs) or with support of a person.
3. Highly adapted wide-based lordotic gait. Can't increase walking speed.
4. Moderately adapted gait. Can pick up speed but can't run.
5. Able to pick up speed but runs with a double stance phase, i.e., cannot achieve both feet off the ground.
6. Runs and gets both feet off the ground (with no double stance phase). The higher the grade, the better the outcome.

TFT is assessed through 3 parameters, one of which is "time to climb 4 standard steps".

The patient was asked to stand at the bottom of the stairs with his arms by his sides. At the "go" signal, he/she had to walk up the stairs as quickly and safely as possible (using handrails if needed) until reaching an erect position on the top stair. The stair climb speed was calculated as 4/time in seconds taken to climb the 4 standard stairs.

Grading of the 4-step ascent was:1. Unable to climb 4 stairs.2. Climbs 4 stairs "marking time" (climbs one foot at a time with both feet on a step before moving to next step), using both arms on one or both handrails.3. Climbs 4 stairs "marking time" (idem as up), using one arm on one handrail.4. Climbs 4 stairs "marking time" (idem as up), not needing handrail.5. Climbs 4 stairs alternating feet, needs handrail for support.6. Climbs 4 stairs alternating feet, not needing handrail support.The higher the grade, the better the outcome.

Time function test (TFT) is assessed through 3 different parameters, one of which was "time to rise from the floor".

The patient started the test lying on his back with arms at his sides and was asked to get up as quickly as possible. The rise from floor velocity was calculated as 1/time in seconds taken to stand up. Grading was as follows:

1. Unable to stand, even with use of a chair.
2. Assisted Gowers' sign - requires furniture to assist in rising to full upright posture.
3. Full Gowers' sign - rolls over, stands up with both hands "climbing up" the legs to achieve full upright posture.
4. Half Gowers' sign - rolls over, stands up with one hand support on leg.
5. Rolls to the side and/or stands up with one hand or both hands on the floor to start to rise up but does not touch legs.
6. Stands up without rolling over or using hands. The higher the grade, the better the outcome.

The 6-minute walk/run test (6MWT) assessed the distance walked in 6 minutes. The 6MWT was performed indoors on a flat, smooth path, at least 30 m long and 3 m wide, with a cone at each end around which the patient had to walk. Six progressively numbered markers were used to mark the distance travelled at each minute. Five progressively lettered markers were used to indicate any falls.

Two staff members were present during the test; the physiotherapist, to give the patient instructions, and a staff member who followed the patient giving encouragements. The patient was instructed to go from cone to cone as fast as he could but without running, and that he could stop to rest whenever he/she wanted. The time walked, distance walked after each minute, time of each fall and distance walked before each fall were registered.

A summary of the 6-minute maximum distance walked/run after 12 months of treatment is reported in minutes.

Percentage of patients with < 10% worsening in 6-Minute Walking Test after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat comparing to placebo patients.

Percentage of patients losing the ability to ambulate from baseline to the end of study (Visit 11 or Month 12)

A summary of the number of patients who fell and the number of falls occurring during the 6MWT is shown.

Evaluation was performed by mean left and right knee extension, mean left and right elbow flexion using the Hand Held Myometry (HHM). Using it, the muscle strength of the knee extensor and elbow flexor were measured via standardized procedures; 3 measurements were recorded from each muscle group on each side. The mean of the 3 measurements was calculated.

Knee Extension: the pt was sitting, pelvis and knee at a 90° angle. His/her feet were above the ground with the femur in neutral rotation. He/she could hold on to the edge of the bed/chair and, in case, additional stabilization was provided at the distal third of the thigh, just above the knee. The HHM was placed on the anterior surface of the lower third of the tibia, proximal to the ankle joint.

Elbow flexion: pt lying on his back, arm by his side, elbow flexed at a 90° angle, forearm in supine position. The MMH was placed between the middle and distal third of the forearm, proximal to the radial styloid process.

A summary of QoL (SF-36, Single items Short Form survey) in the ITT set is shown.

QoL (SF-36) is assessed considering:

• Physical Functioning (PF)
• Role-Physical (RP)
• Bodily Pain (BP)
• General Health (GH)
• Vitality (VT)
• Social Functioning (SF)
• Role-Emotional (RE)
• Mental Health (MH)
• Physical Component Summary (PCS)
• Mental Component Summary (MCS) The SF-36 consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score, the greater the disability. The SF-36 is a set of generic, coherent, and easily administered quality-of-life measures. These measures rely upon patient self-reporting and are widely utilized by managed care organizations for routine monitoring and assessment of care outcomes in adult patients.

Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are defined as those events with an onset date after study treatment initiation. An AE is an untoward medical occurrence after exposure to a medicine, which is not necessarily caused by that medicine. A serious AE is an adverse reaction that results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalisation or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a birth defect.

Evaluation was performed comparing Dixon Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) before and after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat versus placebo.

The lower limb muscles assessed were: whole thigh, quadriceps, medial thigh, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvic girdle. Please note that statistics data are expressed as: Least Square Means (95% CI) for whole thigh, quadriceps, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvis girdle; while as Log Least Square Means (95% CI) for medial thigh.

A summary of mean change in the contractile area of lower limb muscles comparing MRI findings before and after 12 months of treatment in the ITT set is reported. The lower limb muscles considered are the same as the outcome 3. Please note that statistic data are expressed as Least Square Means (95% CI) except for Hamstrings which is expressed as Log Least Square Means.

A summary of the mean change in cross-sectional area (CSA) by type after 12 months of treatment in the ITT set is reported. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as Log Least Square Means (95% CI) for CSA type I fibers, and as Least Square Means (95% CI) for CSA type II fibers and Total CSA.

Evaluation of histologic parameters such as Fiber with nuclear centralizations (%), Total number of fibers (%), and Regenerative fibers (%) were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as log least square mean for Regenerative fibers (%), and total number of fibers (Slides I), while are expressed as least square mean for Fibers with nuclear centralizations (%) and total number of fibers (Slides II and III).

Total of all reporting groups

Evaluation was performed comparing Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS) before and after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat versus placebo. Please note that Statistics data are expressed as log least square mean (IC 95%) for the vastus lateralis and as least square mean (IC 95%) back-transformed on the original scale for the soleus.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Evaluation was performed comparing Dixon Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) before and after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat versus placebo.

The lower limb muscles assessed were: whole thigh, quadriceps, medial thigh, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvic girdle. Please note that statistics data are expressed as: Least Square Means (95% CI) for whole thigh, quadriceps, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvis girdle; while as Log Least Square Means (95% CI) for medial thigh.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Evaluation was performed comparing Dixon MRI findings before and after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat versus placebo.

Dixon technique has advantages in multiple applications for evaluation of musculoskeletal system diseases. It allows more robust fat suppression than do other sequences and can be used in combination with multiple different sequences (GRE and SE) and using different weightings (T1, T2, or proton density).

The lower limb muscles assessed were: whole thigh, quadriceps, medial thigh, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvic girdle (data showed as least square mean)

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

A summary of mean change in the contractile area of lower limb muscles comparing MRI findings before and after 12 months of treatment in the ITT set is reported. The lower limb muscles considered are the same as the outcome 3. Please note that statistic data are expressed as Least Square Means (95% CI) except for Hamstrings which is expressed as Log Least Square Means.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

A summary of the mean change in cross-sectional area (CSA) by type after 12 months of treatment in the ITT set is reported. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as Log Least Square Means (95% CI) for CSA type I fibers, and as Least Square Means (95% CI) for CSA type II fibers and Total CSA.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Evaluation of histologic parameters such as Fiber with nuclear centralizations (%), Total number of fibers (%), and Regenerative fibers (%) were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as log least square mean for Regenerative fibers (%), and total number of fibers (Slides I), while are expressed as least square mean for Fibers with nuclear centralizations (%) and total number of fibers (Slides II and III).

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned.

Evaluation of histology parameters such as Muscle Fibers Area [MFA](%), were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. MFA fraction was determined from biopsies using the mean of available fields. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as least square mean.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Evaluation of histology parameters such as Adipose tissue (%) were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as log least square mean.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Evaluation of other histological structures like necrotic cells, vessels and any other nonconnective tissue present in the microscopic field were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. The value is shown as % compared to the arithmetic mean of the two positive control (i.e., healthy subjects) bands present in the same western blot. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as log least square mean.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Evaluation were performed using the MFM32 scale, that is a tool designed for neuromuscular diseases and is applicable to all degrees of disease severity. It was validated in terms of reproducibility, construct validity, and concurrent validity. It consists of 32 items (tasks) classified into three dimensions: D1, standing and transfers; D2, axial and proximal motor capacity; and D3, distal motor capacity. Each item is scored on a four-point Likert scale. The generic grading is measured as follows: 0, cannot initiate the task or cannot maintain the starting position; 1, partially performs the task; 2, performs the task with compensatory movements (position maintained for an insufficient period of time, slowness, uncontrolled movements, etc.); and 3, performs the task fully and 'normally', the movement being controlled, mastered, directed, and performed at a constant speed. The overall total score ranging from 0 (severe functional impairment) to 100 (no functional impairment).

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

TFT is assessed through 3 different parameters one of which is time to walk/run 10 m. The test was performed with or without orthoses as the patient preferred. He/she was not asked to run, but rather to arrive at the finish line as soon as possible leaving him the choice on how to do so. The assessor walked alongside the patient for safety but couldn't help her/him in any way. The walk/run speed was calculated as 10/time in seconds taken to run/walk 10 m. The test was graded as follows:

1. Unable to walk independently.
2. Unable to walk independently but can walk with full leg calipers (KAFOs) or with support of a person.
3. Highly adapted wide-based lordotic gait. Can't increase walking speed.
4. Moderately adapted gait. Can pick up speed but can't run.
5. Able to pick up speed but runs with a double stance phase, i.e., cannot achieve both feet off the ground.
6. Runs and gets both feet off the ground (with no double stance phase). The higher the grade, the better the outcome.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

TFT is assessed through 3 parameters, one of which is "time to climb 4 standard steps".

The patient was asked to stand at the bottom of the stairs with his arms by his sides. At the "go" signal, he/she had to walk up the stairs as quickly and safely as possible (using handrails if needed) until reaching an erect position on the top stair. The stair climb speed was calculated as 4/time in seconds taken to climb the 4 standard stairs.

Grading of the 4-step ascent was:1. Unable to climb 4 stairs.2. Climbs 4 stairs "marking time" (climbs one foot at a time with both feet on a step before moving to next step), using both arms on one or both handrails.3. Climbs 4 stairs "marking time" (idem as up), using one arm on one handrail.4. Climbs 4 stairs "marking time" (idem as up), not needing handrail.5. Climbs 4 stairs alternating feet, needs handrail for support.6. Climbs 4 stairs alternating feet, not needing handrail support.The higher the grade, the better the outcome.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set. Please consider the data are showed in Log Least Square Mean

Time function test (TFT) is assessed through 3 different parameters, one of which was "time to rise from the floor".

The patient started the test lying on his back with arms at his sides and was asked to get up as quickly as possible. The rise from floor velocity was calculated as 1/time in seconds taken to stand up. Grading was as follows:

1. Unable to stand, even with use of a chair.
2. Assisted Gowers' sign - requires furniture to assist in rising to full upright posture.
3. Full Gowers' sign - rolls over, stands up with both hands "climbing up" the legs to achieve full upright posture.
4. Half Gowers' sign - rolls over, stands up with one hand support on leg.
5. Rolls to the side and/or stands up with one hand or both hands on the floor to start to rise up but does not touch legs.
6. Stands up without rolling over or using hands. The higher the grade, the better the outcome.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

The 6-minute walk/run test (6MWT) assessed the distance walked in 6 minutes. The 6MWT was performed indoors on a flat, smooth path, at least 30 m long and 3 m wide, with a cone at each end around which the patient had to walk. Six progressively numbered markers were used to mark the distance travelled at each minute. Five progressively lettered markers were used to indicate any falls.

Two staff members were present during the test; the physiotherapist, to give the patient instructions, and a staff member who followed the patient giving encouragements. The patient was instructed to go from cone to cone as fast as he could but without running, and that he could stop to rest whenever he/she wanted. The time walked, distance walked after each minute, time of each fall and distance walked before each fall were registered.

A summary of the 6-minute maximum distance walked/run after 12 months of treatment is reported in minutes.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Percentage of patients with < 10% worsening in 6-Minute Walking Test after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat comparing to placebo patients.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Patients with missing data such that <10% worsening cannot be determined are included in the analysis as having worsened

Percentage of patients losing the ability to ambulate from baseline to the end of study (Visit 11 or Month 12)

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

A summary of the number of patients who fell and the number of falls occurring during the 6MWT is shown.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Evaluation was performed by mean left and right knee extension, mean left and right elbow flexion using the Hand Held Myometry (HHM). Using it, the muscle strength of the knee extensor and elbow flexor were measured via standardized procedures; 3 measurements were recorded from each muscle group on each side. The mean of the 3 measurements was calculated.

Knee Extension: the pt was sitting, pelvis and knee at a 90° angle. His/her feet were above the ground with the femur in neutral rotation. He/she could hold on to the edge of the bed/chair and, in case, additional stabilization was provided at the distal third of the thigh, just above the knee. The HHM was placed on the anterior surface of the lower third of the tibia, proximal to the ankle joint.

Elbow flexion: pt lying on his back, arm by his side, elbow flexed at a 90° angle, forearm in supine position. The MMH was placed between the middle and distal third of the forearm, proximal to the radial styloid process.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

A summary of QoL (SF-36, Single items Short Form survey) in the ITT set is shown.

QoL (SF-36) is assessed considering:

• Physical Functioning (PF)
• Role-Physical (RP)
• Bodily Pain (BP)
• General Health (GH)
• Vitality (VT)
• Social Functioning (SF)
• Role-Emotional (RE)
• Mental Health (MH)
• Physical Component Summary (PCS)
• Mental Component Summary (MCS) The SF-36 consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score, the greater the disability. The SF-36 is a set of generic, coherent, and easily administered quality-of-life measures. These measures rely upon patient self-reporting and are widely utilized by managed care organizations for routine monitoring and assessment of care outcomes in adult patients.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are defined as those events with an onset date after study treatment initiation. An AE is an untoward medical occurrence after exposure to a medicine, which is not necessarily caused by that medicine. A serious AE is an adverse reaction that results in death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalisation or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a birth defect.

Safety Set: all patients who received at least one dose of study medication. Patients were analyzed according to the study treatment actually received. The safety set was used for the safety analysis.

Evaluation was performed comparing Dixon Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) before and after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat versus placebo.

The lower limb muscles assessed were: whole thigh, quadriceps, medial thigh, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvic girdle. Please note that statistics data are expressed as: Least Square Means (95% CI) for whole thigh, quadriceps, hamstrings, triceps surae and pelvis girdle; while as Log Least Square Means (95% CI) for medial thigh.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

A summary of mean change in the contractile area of lower limb muscles comparing MRI findings before and after 12 months of treatment in the ITT set is reported. The lower limb muscles considered are the same as the outcome 3. Please note that statistic data are expressed as Least Square Means (95% CI) except for Hamstrings which is expressed as Log Least Square Means.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

A summary of the mean change in cross-sectional area (CSA) by type after 12 months of treatment in the ITT set is reported. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as Log Least Square Means (95% CI) for CSA type I fibers, and as Least Square Means (95% CI) for CSA type II fibers and Total CSA.

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned. Efficacy analyses were performed on the ITT set.

Evaluation of histologic parameters such as Fiber with nuclear centralizations (%), Total number of fibers (%), and Regenerative fibers (%) were performed comparing muscle biopsies after 12 months of treatment with Givinostat. Please note that descriptive statistic data are expressed as log least square mean for Regenerative fibers (%), and total number of fibers (Slides I), while are expressed as least square mean for Fibers with nuclear centralizations (%) and total number of fibers (Slides II and III).

Intent-To-Treat Analysis (ITT) Set: all patients assigned treatment by randomization who received at least one dose of study medication. According to the intent to treat principle, patients were analyzed according to the treatment assigned.

Placebo oral suspension (10 mg/mL) twice daily in a fed state

placebo: suspension manufactured to mimic givinostat