MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

S1169 Twelve-Month Interim Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Givosiran, an Investigational RNAi Therapeutic for Acute Hepatic Porphyria, in the ENVISION Open Label Extension

2020· article· en· W3093489725 on OpenAlexaff
Eliane Sardh, Manisha Balwani, David C. Rees, Penelope E. Stein, Ulrich Stölzel, D. Montgomery Bissell, Herbert L. Bonkovsky, Sioḃán Keel, Charles Parker, John D. Phillips, Samuel Silver, Jerzy Windyga, Delia D’Avola, Gayle Ross, Peter Stewart, Bruce Ritchie, Pauline Harper, Jiaan‐Der Wang, Janneke G. Langendonk, Aneta Ivanova, Yutaka Horie, Karl E. Anderson, Paolo Ventura, Maria Domenica Cappellini, Daphne Vassiliou, Susana Monroy, Petro E. Petrides, Tomohide Adachi, David J. Kuter, Sushama Scalera, Craig Penz, Shangbin Liu, John J. Ko, Amy Simon, Laurent Gouya

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPorphyrin Metabolism and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalAlberta Hospital Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboPorphobilinogenInternal medicineGastroenterologyClinical endpointClinical trialPharmacologyPorphyriaPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Acute hepatic porphyria (AHP) is a family of rare genetic diseases due to enzyme defects in hepatic heme biosynthesis. Induction of 5-aminolevulinic acid synthase 1 (ALAS1), the rate-limiting step in heme biosynthesis, can lead to accumulation of toxic heme intermediates 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) and porphobilinogen (PBG), causing neurovisceral attacks and chronic manifestations. Givosiran, an investigational RNAi therapeutic, targets liver ALAS1 to reduce ALA/PBG and ameliorate attacks and clinical manifestations. METHODS: ENVISION (NCT03338816) is an ongoing Phase 3 global, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, evaluating the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous monthly doses of 2.5 mg/kg givosiran in AHP patients in a 6-month double-blind (DB) period and an open label extension (OLE) period (up to 30 months). During the OLE, patients received either 2.5 mg/kg or 1.25 mg/kg monthly givosiran. Outcome measures included composite annualized attack rate (AAR) requiring hospitalization, urgent care, or IV-hemin at home, ALA/PBG levels, hemin use, daily worst symptoms, and quality of life (QoL). Analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: As of July 23, 2019, 93 patients entered the OLE: 56 (placebo/givosiran = 29; givosiran/givosiran = 27) received 2.5 mg/kg monthly givosiran, and 37 (placebo/givosiran = 17; givosiran/givosiran = 20) received 1.25 mg/kg. In givosiran patients (both doses), median AAR was 1.1 (range: 0–20.5) through Month 12. In placebo patients who crossed over to givosiran in the OLE, median AAR (DB = 10.65; OLE = 1.81) and proportion of attack-free patients (DB = 17.4%; OLE = 42.2%) were similar to the givosiran group in the DB period (median AAR = 1.04; attack free patients = 48.9%). In addition, sustained lowering of ALA/PBG in the OLE was accompanied by reductions in hemin use, daily worst pain and analgesic use, and improvements in QoL. Among patients on givosiran through Month 12, 62% had ≥1 drug-related adverse event (AE) and 3% had ≥1 drug-related serious AE. There were no new AEs leading to discontinuation and no deaths. No new safety concerns occurred in the OLE. There was a trend toward increased efficacy with the 2.5 mg/kg dose compared to 1.25 mg/kg dose, and safety was acceptable at both doses. CONCLUSION: In an ongoing Phase 3 study, givosiran 2.5 mg/kg monthly demonstrated maintenance or enhancement of clinical efficacy and an acceptable safety profile consistent with that observed in the 6-month DB period.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.295 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of GastroenterologySame topicPorphyrin Metabolism and DisordersFrench-language works237,207