A Phase 3 Trial of Seladelpar in Primary Biliary Cholangitis
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Effective treatments for patients with primary biliary cholangitis are limited. Seladelpar, a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor delta agonist, has potential benefits. METHODS: In this phase 3, 12-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) patients who had had an inadequate response to or who had a history of unacceptable side effects with ursodeoxycholic acid to receive oral seladelpar at a dose of 10 mg daily or placebo. The primary end point was a biochemical response, which was defined as an alkaline phosphatase level less than 1.67 times the upper limit of the normal range, with a decrease of 15% or more from baseline, and a normal total bilirubin level at month 12. Key secondary end points were normalization of the alkaline phosphatase level at month 12 and a change in the score on the pruritus numerical rating scale (range, 0 [no itch] to 10 [worst itch imaginable]) from baseline to month 6 among patients with a baseline score of at least 4 (indicating moderate-to-severe pruritus). RESULTS: Of the 193 patients who underwent randomization and treatment, 93.8% received ursodeoxycholic acid as standard-of-care background therapy. A greater percentage of the patients in the seladelpar group than in the placebo group had a biochemical response (61.7% vs. 20.0%; difference, 41.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 27.7 to 53.4, P<0.001). Normalization of the alkaline phosphatase level also occurred in a greater percentage of patients who received seladelpar than of those who received placebo (25.0% vs. 0%; difference, 25.0 percentage points; 95% CI, 18.3 to 33.2, P<0.001). Seladelpar resulted in a greater reduction in the score on the pruritus numerical rating scale than placebo (least-squares mean change from baseline, -3.2 vs. -1.7; least-squares mean difference, -1.5; 95% CI, -2.5 to -0.5, P = 0.005). Adverse events were reported in 86.7% of the patients in the seladelpar group and in 84.6% in the placebo group, and serious adverse events in 7.0% and 6.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with primary biliary cholangitis, the percentage of patients who had a biochemical response and alkaline phosphatase normalization was significantly greater with seladelpar than with placebo. Seladelpar also significantly reduced pruritus among patients who had moderate-to-severe pruritus at baseline. The incidence and severity of adverse events were similar in the two groups. (Funded by CymaBay Therapeutics; RESPONSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04620733; EudraCT number, 2020-004348-27.).
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.
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 | 0,001 | 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 | 0,000 | 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 découle