MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286509886 · doi:10.1016/j.jhepr.2022.100544

Farnesoid X receptor agonist tropifexor attenuates cholestasis in a randomised trial in patients with primary biliary cholangitis

2022· article· en· W4286509886 on OpenAlexaff
Christoph Schramm, Heiner Wedemeyer, Andrew L. Mason, Gideon M. Hirschfield, Cynthia Levy, Kris V. Kowdley, Piotr Milkiewicz, Ewa Janczewska, Elena Sergeevna Malova, Johanne Sanni, Phillip J. Koo, Jin Chen, Subhajit Choudhury, Lloyd B. Klickstein, Michael K. Badman, David Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueJHEP Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Liver CentreUniversity of Alberta
FundersNovartis Institutes for BioMedical ResearchIntercept PharmaceuticalsMedical Research CouncilMerckDr. Falk PharmaGlaxoSmithKlineNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNovartisPfizer
KeywordsUrsodeoxycholic acidTolerabilityPlaceboMedicineDiscontinuationInternal medicineObeticholic acidAdverse effectCholestasisGastroenterologyPrimary biliary cirrhosisFarnesoid X receptorAgonistReceptorPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background & Aims The safety, tolerability, and efficacy of the non-bile acid farnesoid X receptor agonist tropifexor were evaluated in a phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study as potential second-line therapy for patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) with an inadequate ursodeoxycholic acid response. Methods Patients were randomised (2:1) to receive tropifexor (30, 60, 90, or 150 μg) or matched placebo orally once daily for 28 days, with follow-up on Days 56 and 84. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability of tropifexor and reduction in levels of γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT) and other liver biomarkers. Other objectives included patient-reported outcome measures using the PBC-40 quality-of-life (QoL) and visual analogue scale scores and tropifexor pharmacokinetics. Results Of 61 enrolled patients, 11, 9, 12, and 8 received 30-, 60-, 90-, and 150-μg tropifexor, respectively, and 21 received placebo; 3 patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events (AEs) in the 150-μg tropifexor group. Pruritus was the most frequent AE in the study (52.5% [tropifexor] vs . 28.6% [placebo]), with most events of mild to moderate severity. Decreases seen in LDL-, HDL-, and total-cholesterol levels at 60-, 90-, and 150 μg doses stabilised after treatment discontinuation. By Day 28, tropifexor caused 26–72% reduction in GGT from baseline at 30- to 150-μg doses ( p <0.001 at 60-, 90-, and 150-μg tropifexor vs . placebo). Day 28 QoL scores were comparable between the placebo and tropifexor groups. A dose-dependent increase in plasma tropifexor concentration was observed, with 5- to 5.55-fold increases in AUC 0-8h and C max between 30- and 150-μg doses. Conclusions Tropifexor showed improvement in cholestatic markers relative to placebo, predictable pharmacokinetics, and an acceptable safety–tolerability profile, thereby supporting its potential further clinical development for PBC. Lay summary The bile acid ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the standard-of-care therapy for primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), but approximately 40% of patients have an inadequate response to this therapy. Tropifexor is a highly potent non-bile acid agonist of the farnesoid X receptor that is under clinical development for various chronic liver diseases. In the current study, in patients with an inadequate response to UDCA, tropifexor was found to be safe and well tolerated, with improved levels of markers of bile duct injury at very low (microgram) doses. Itch of mild to moderate severity was observed in all groups including placebo but was more frequent at the highest tropifexor dose. Clinical Trials Registration This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02516605).

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
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)0.0050.001

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 head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations48
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJHEP ReportsSame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207