S1154 Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Acute Hepatic Porphyria Treated With Givosiran Who Stopped Hemin Prophylaxis at Study Entry: A Post Hoc Analysis of Data From the Phase 3 ENVISION Study Through Month 12
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Acute Hepatic Porphyria (AHP) is a family of rare genetic diseases due to enzyme defects in heme synthesis in the liver. Accumulation of toxic heme intermediates ALA and PBG may result in neurovisceral attacks and chronic manifestations. Intravenous (IV) hemin is approved to treat acute attacks and is sometimes used off-label prophylactically. In the ENVISION study in AHP patients, givosiran, an RNAi therapeutic, reduced the composite porphyria annualized porphyria attack rate (AAR) vs. placebo (pbo). A post-hoc analysis was conducted to evaluate outcomes in AHP patients with or without prior hemin prophylaxis prior to screening. METHODS: ENVISION (NCT03338816) is an ongoing Phase 3 global, randomized, pbo-controlled study, evaluating givosiran efficacy and safety in symptomatic AHP patients in a 6-month double blind (DB) period and an open label extension (OLE) period (30 months). Patients were required to discontinue prophylactic hemin treatment at study entry, but could receive hemin for acute attacks. Outcome measures included the composite porphyria AAR (defined as attacks requiring hospitalization, urgent care, or IV hemin at home). Analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: For AHP patients on prior hemin prophylaxis (median historical AAR: 9.0), a 77% reduction in mean AAR was observed with givosiran treatment vs. pbo in the DB period (Table 1). A similar reduction (63%) in mean AAR was observed in those without prior hemin prophylaxis (median historical AAR: 7.0). In both groups, further reduction in AAR was observed in patients who continued on givosiran in the OLE period (Table 1). A similar reduction in AAR was also observed in both groups of pbo patients who received givosiran in the OLE (Table 1). The percentage of patients with 0 composite attacks increased in each group following 6-months of givosiran treatment in the OLE with 55% and 67% in the patients who had continued givosiran treatment (Table 1). Additional analyses of outcome measures between the two groups will be presented. CONCLUSION: Clinically meaningful reduction in the AAR was observed in AHP patients treated with givosiran regardless of whether they received hemin prophylaxis prior to study entry, with further AAR reduction observed in those who continued to receive givosiran during the OLE. In addition, a similar benefit was observed in pbo patients who received givosiran for 6-months during the OLE period regardless of prior hemin prophylaxis use.Table 1
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».