MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125174675 · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2021.01.013

A randomized placebo-controlled trial of elafibranor in patients with primary biliary cholangitis and incomplete response to UDCA

2021· article· en· W3125174675 on OpenAlexaff
Jörn M. Schattenberg, Albert Parés, Kris V. Kowdley, Michael A. Heneghan, Stephen H. Caldwell, Daniel S. Pratt, Alan Bonder, Gideon M. Hirschfield, Cynthia Levy, John M. Vierling, David Jones, Anne Tailleux, Bart Staels, S. Megnien, Rémy Hanf, David Magrez, P Birman, Velimir A. Luketic

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hepatology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsToronto Liver CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsUrsodeoxycholic acidGastroenterologyPlaceboInternal medicineMedicineClinical endpointAlkaline phosphataseBilirubinRandomized controlled trialPathologyBiologyEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) who have an incomplete response to ursodeoxycholic acid remain at risk of disease progression. We investigated the safety and efficacy of elafibranor, a dual PPARα/δ agonist, in patients with PBC. METHODS: This 12-week, double-blind phase II trial enrolled 45 adults with PBC who had incomplete response to ursodeoxycholic acid (alkaline phosphatase levels ≥1.67-fold the upper limit of normal (ULN). Patients were randomly assigned to elafibranor 80 mg, elafibranor 120 mg or placebo. The primary endpoint was the relative change of ALP at 12 weeks (NCT03124108). RESULTS: At 12 weeks, ALP was reduced by -48.3±14.8% in the elafibranor 80 mg group (p <0.001 vs. placebo) and by -40.6±17.4% in the elafibranor 120 mg group (p <0.001) compared to a +3.2±14.8% increase in the placebo group. The composite endpoint of ALP ≤1.67-fold the ULN, decrease of ALP >15% and total bilirubin below the ULN was achieved in 67% patients in the elafibranor 80 mg group and 79% patients in the elafibranor 120 mg group, vs. 6.7% patients in the placebo group. Levels of gamma-glutamyltransferase decreased by 37.0±25.5% in the elafibranor 80 mg group (p <0.001) and 40.0±24.1% in the elafibranor 120 mg group (p <0.01) compared to no change (+0.2±26.0%) in the placebo group. Levels of disease markers such as IgM, 5'-nucleotidase or high-sensitivity C-reactive protein were likewise reduced by elafibranor. Pruritus was not induced or exacerbated by elafibranor and patients with pruritus at baseline reported less pruritic symptoms at the end of treatment. All possibly drug-related non-serious adverse events were mild to moderate. CONCLUSION: In this randomized phase II trial, elafibranor was generally safe and well tolerated and significantly reduced levels of ALP, composite endpoints of bilirubin and ALP, as well as other markers of disease activity in patients with PBC and an incomplete response to ursodeoxycholic acid. LAY SUMMARY: Patients with primary biliary cholangitis (a rare chronic liver disease) that do not respond to standard therapy remain at risk of disease progression toward cirrhosis and impaired quality of life. Elafibranor is a nuclear receptor agonist that we tested in a randomized clinical trial over 12 weeks. It successfully decreased levels of disease activity markers, including alkaline phosphatase. Thus, this study is the foundation for a larger prospective study that will determine the efficacy and safety of this drug as a second-line therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinical Trials.gov NCT03124108.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations178
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HepatologySame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207