MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979874565 · doi:10.1016/j.jacl.2019.10.003

Effect of evolocumab on lipoprotein apheresis requirement and lipid levels: Results of the randomized, controlled, open-label DE LAVAL study

2019· article· en· W2979874565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Seth J. Baum, Tiziana Sampietro, D. Datta, Patrick M. Moriarty, Beat Knüsel, Jingjing Schneider, Ransi Somaratne, Christopher E. Kurtz, Bernd Hohenstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of clinical lipidology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNovartis PharmaMiltenyi BiotecAmgen
KeywordsEvolocumabMedicineApheresisClinical endpointRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineAlirocumabGastroenterologyUrologyLipoproteinCholesterolEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) can effectively lower lipoproteins but is an invasive procedure. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate whether evolocumab can reduce LA requirement in patients undergoing chronic LA. METHODS: Patients on regular weekly or every-2-week LA and moderate- to high-intensity statin (if tolerated) with pre-LA low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels ≥2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) to ≤4.9 mmol/L (190 mg/dL) were randomized to continue the same LA frequency, or discontinue LA and receive evolocumab 140 mg every-2-weeks subcutaneously for 6 weeks. At week 6, all patients received only open-label evolocumab for 18 weeks. The primary endpoint was LA avoidance at the end of 6 weeks based on achieving pre-LA LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L at week 4. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients (mean [SD] age 62 [10] years, 59% male, 82% with familial hypercholesterolemia) were randomized (evolocumab, n = 19; LA, n = 20). At the end of 6 weeks, more patients receiving evolocumab avoided LA than those receiving LA (84% vs 10%; treatment difference, 74% [95% CI: 45, 87]; P < .0001). Thirty patients (77%) did not require LA at 24 weeks. Evolocumab reduced pre-LA LDL-C by 50% from the baseline to week 4 compared with a 3% increase in the LA arm. Pre-LA LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) was achieved by 10 patients (53%) receiving evolocumab and none receiving LA (week 4). Safety was comparable between arms. CONCLUSION: Evolocumab treatment significantly reduced LA requirement in patients undergoing chronic LA. In addition, >50% of patients achieved LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L on evolocumab alone, demonstrating that in patients with pre-LA LDL-C ≤4.9 mmol/L, evolocumab may replace LA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of clinical lipidologySame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207