Efficacy and safety of alirocumab in statin-intolerant patients over 3 years: open-label treatment period of the ODYSSEY ALTERNATIVE trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 24-week randomized, double-blind ODYSSEY ALTERNATIVE trial (NCT01709513) demonstrated significant low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reductions with the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab vs ezetimibe in statin-intolerant patients, with significantly fewer skeletal muscle events (SMEs; 32.5%) vs atorvastatin (46.0%; hazard ratio: 0.61, 95% confidence interval: 0.38 to 0.99, P = .042). OBJECTIVE: ALTERNATIVE participants could enter an open-label treatment period (OLTP) for assessment of long-term safety. METHODS: Two hundred and eighty one patients entered the OLTP; 93.7%, 84.0%, and 92.9% of patients who received atorvastatin, ezetimibe, and alirocumab, respectively, during double-blind treatment, including 216 patients (76.9%) who completed double-blind treatment, as well as patients who either prematurely discontinued treatment due to SME (n = 51 [18.1%]) or other reasons (n = 14 [5.0%]) but completed week 24 assessments. All patients in the OLTP received alirocumab (75 or 150 mg every 2 weeks based on investigator decision) for ∼3 years or until commercial availability, whichever came first. RESULTS: SMEs were reported by 38.4% of patients in the OLTP. Safety results from the OLTP were similar to those of the alirocumab group in the double-blind period, except for a lower rate of discontinuations due to SMEs observed with alirocumab in the OLTP (3.2% vs 15.9% in the double-blind period). At OLTP week 8, mean LDL-C reduction from baseline (=week 0 of double-blind period) was 52.0%, with reductions sustained through to the end-of-treatment visits (55.4% and 53.7% reduction at weeks 100 and 148, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this population of statin-intolerant patients, alirocumab was well tolerated and produced durable LDL-C reductions over 3 years.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".