Fasinumab (REGN475), an antibody against nerve growth factor for the treatment of pain: Results from a double-blind, placebo-controlled exploratory study in osteoarthritis of the knee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The safety, tolerability, and efficacy of fasinumab (REGN475), a fully human monoclonal antibody against nerve growth factor, was evaluated for the treatment of pain in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. This was a 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, repeat-dose, exploratory study. Eligible patients 40 to 75 years of age with a diagnosis of OA of the knee and moderate to severe pain were randomized 1:1:1:1 to intravenous fasinumab 0.03, 0.1, or 0.3 mg/kg or placebo and received study drug on day 1 and day 57. Pain intensity was recorded daily using the numeric rating scale. Safety and tolerability, assessed by the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), was the primary study endpoint. Secondary study endpoints included the change from baseline in daily walking knee pain and the assessment of pain, function, and stiffness using the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index. Baseline characteristics were similar among treatment groups (N=217). After 24 weeks, the incidence of TEAEs ranged from 66.1% to 75.0% in the fasinumab groups vs. 63.6% for placebo. The most common TEAEs included arthralgia, hyperesthesia, myalgia, peripheral edema, and joint swelling. Discontinuation for TEAEs occurred in 5.6% of fasinumab patients and 3.7% of placebo patients. All 3 doses of fasinumab were associated with significant (P<.05) improvements compared with placebo in walking knee pain and WOMAC total and subscale scores. Fasinumab was generally well tolerated, and was associated with a significant reduction in walking knee pain and an improvement in function for up to 8 weeks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".