Long-term treatment of Cushing’s disease with pasireotide: 5-year results from an open-label extension study of a Phase III trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treating hypercortisolism in patients with Cushing's disease after failed surgery often requires chronic medication, underlining the need for therapies with favourable long-term efficacy and safety profiles. METHODS: In a randomised, double-blind study, 162 adult patients with persistent/recurrent or de novo Cushing's disease received pasireotide. Patients with mean urinary free cortisol at/below the upper limit of normal or clinical benefit at month 12 could continue receiving pasireotide during an open-ended, open-label phase, the outcomes of which are described herein. RESULTS: Sixteen patients received 5 years of pasireotide treatment. Among these, median (95% confidence interval) percentage change from baseline in mean urinary free cortisol was -82.6% (-89.0, -41.9) and -81.8% (-89.8, -67.4) at months 12 and 60. Eleven patients had mean urinary free cortisol ≤ upper limit of normal at month 60. Improvements in clinical signs were sustained during long-term treatment. The safety profile of pasireotide at 5 years was similar to that reported after 12 months. Fifteen of 16 patients experienced a hyperglycaemia-related adverse event; glycated haemoglobin levels were stable between months 6 and 60. Adverse events related to hyperglycaemia, bradycardia, gallbladder/biliary tract, and liver safety were most likely to first occur by month 6; adverse event severity did not tend to worsen over time. CONCLUSIONS: This represents the longest prospective trial of a medical therapy for Cushing's disease to date. A subset of patients treated with pasireotide maintained biochemical and clinical improvements for 5 years, with no new safety signals emerging. These data support the use of pasireotide as an effective long-term therapy for some patients with Cushing's disease.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".