Combination Therapies Including Cilofexor and Firsocostat for Bridging Fibrosis and Cirrhosis Attributable to NASH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Advanced fibrosis attributable to NASH is a leading cause of end-stage liver disease. APPROACH AND RESULTS: In this phase 2b trial, 392 patients with bridging fibrosis or compensated cirrhosis (F3-F4) were randomized to receive placebo, selonsertib 18 mg, cilofexor 30 mg, or firsocostat 20 mg, alone or in two-drug combinations, once-daily for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was a ≥1-stage improvement in fibrosis without worsening of NASH between baseline and 48 weeks based on central pathologist review. Exploratory endpoints included changes in NAFLD Activity Score (NAS), liver histology assessed using a machine learning (ML) approach, liver biochemistry, and noninvasive markers. The majority had cirrhosis (56%) and NAS ≥5 (83%). The primary endpoint was achieved in 11% of placebo-treated patients versus cilofexor/firsocostat (21%; P = 0.17), cilofexor/selonsertib (19%; P = 0.26), firsocostat/selonsertib (15%; P = 0.62), firsocostat (12%; P = 0.94), and cilofexor (12%; P = 0.96). Changes in hepatic collagen by morphometry were not significant, but cilofexor/firsocostat led to a significant decrease in ML NASH CRN fibrosis score (P = 0.040) and a shift in biopsy area from F3-F4 to ≤F2 fibrosis patterns. Compared to placebo, significantly higher proportions of cilofexor/firsocostat patients had a ≥2-point NAS reduction; reductions in steatosis, lobular inflammation, and ballooning; and significant improvements in alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), bilirubin, bile acids, cytokeratin-18, insulin, estimated glomerular filtration rate, ELF score, and liver stiffness by transient elastography (all P ≤ 0.05). Pruritus occurred in 20%-29% of cilofexor versus 15% of placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with bridging fibrosis and cirrhosis, 48 weeks of cilofexor/firsocostat was well tolerated, led to improvements in NASH activity, and may have an antifibrotic effect. This combination offers potential for fibrosis regression with longer-term therapy in patients with advanced fibrosis attributable to NASH.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".