MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208029444 · doi:10.1007/s12325-021-01898-1

Long-Term Survival, Safety and Tolerability with Selexipag in Patients with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Results from GRIPHON and its Open-Label Extension

2021· article· en· W3208029444 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nazzareno Galiè, Seán Gaine, Richard N. Channick, Gerry Coghlan, Marius M. Hoeper, Iréne Lang, Vallerie V. McLaughlin, Cheryl Lassen, Lewis J. Rubin, Shu‐Fang Hsu Schmitz, Olivier Sitbon, Victor F. Tapson, Kelly Chin

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersActelion PharmaceuticalsSeoul St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic University of KoreaUniversitaire Ziekenhuizen Leuven, KU LeuvenGuangdong Provincial People's HospitalUniversität WienPeking Union Medical CollegeKarl-Franzens-Universität GrazUniversity of OttawaMedizinische Universität GrazPeking Union Medical College HospitalChangi General HospitalRoyal Adelaide HospitalSamsungAarhus UniversitetshospitalShanghai Pulmonary HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de ToulouseUniversität GreifswaldSeoul National University HospitalRenji HospitalSeoul National UniversityCatholic University of KoreaAarhus UniversitetJewish General HospitalMedizinische Universität WienUniversity of AlbertaRigshospitalet
KeywordsTolerabilityMedicineDiscontinuationInternal medicineClinical endpointAdverse effectPlaceboPulmonary hypertensionClinical trialPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: In the event-driven GRIPHON randomised-controlled trial, the oral prostacyclin receptor agonist selexipag significantly reduced the risk of disease progression (composite primary endpoint of morbidity/mortality), compared with placebo, in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). The ongoing open-label extension study (GRIPHON OL) collects further data on long-term safety, tolerability, and survival of PAH patients treated with selexipag. METHODS: Patients randomised to selexipag or placebo in GRIPHON could enter GRIPHON OL either after experiencing a morbidity event during double-blind treatment or at the end of the study. Patients were followed for adverse events (AE) and survival from selexipag initiation up to 3 days and 30 days after end of treatment, respectively. Data are presented up to a cut-off date of 1 September 2019. RESULTS: Overall, 953 patients in GRIPHON and GRIPHON OL were treated with selexipag. At the time of selexipag initiation, 81.2% of patients were receiving background PAH therapy. Median (min, max) exposure to selexipag was 31.7 months (0, 106), corresponding to a total of 3054.4 patient-years. The most frequently reported AEs were related to known prostacyclin-related effects or underlying disease. There were 305 (32.0%) patients who experienced an AE leading to treatment discontinuation. Survival during GRIPHON and GRIPHON OL was assessed for the 574 patients randomised to selexipag in GRIPHON. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates (95%CI) at 1, 3, 5 and 7 years were 92.0% (89.4, 94.0), 79.3% (75.4, 82.6), 71.2% (66.5, 75.3) and 63.0% (57.4, 68.1), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide the longest follow-up period published to date for a PAH therapy. The safety profile of selexipag over this extended treatment period was consistent with that observed in GRIPHON. A large proportion of the population was receiving background therapy at selexipag initiation, providing further insight into the long-term safety of selexipag as part of a combination therapy regimen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01106014 and NCT01112306.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in TherapySame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207