MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362523215 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065613

Study protocol of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-arm parallel-group, multi-centre phase 3 pivotal trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of recombinant human alkaline phosphatase for treatment of patients with sepsis-associated acute kidney injury

2023· article· en· W4362523215 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Pickkers, Derek C. Angus, Jacques Arend, Rinaldo Bellomo, Erik van den Berg, Juliane Bernholz, Morten H. Bestle, Kristine Broglio, Jan E. Carlsen, Christopher J. Doig, Ricard Ferrer, Michael Joannidis, Bruno François, Kent Doi, John A. Kellum, Pierre‐François Laterre, Kathleen D. Liu, Ravindra L. Mehta, Patrick Murray, Marlies Ostermann, Ville Pettilä, Sharon Richards, Paul J. Young, Alexander Zarbock, Anne Louise Kjølbye

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlkaline Phosphatase Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersGrifolsAbiomedAstute MedicalGilead SciencesShionogiSanofiFresenius Medical Care North AmericaAstraZenecaPfizerAmgen
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboInterim analysisTolerabilityClinical trialInternal medicineAcute kidney injurySepsisRandomized controlled trialData monitoring committeeKidney diseaseRenal functionAdverse effectSurgeryPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis, the leading cause of acute kidney injury (AKI), is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) is an endogenous detoxifying enzyme. A recombinant human ALP compound, ilofotase alfa, showed no safety or tolerability concerns in a phase 2 trial. Renal function improvement over 28 days was significantly greater in the ilofotase alfa group. Moreover, a significant relative reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality of >40% was observed. A follow-up trial has been designed to confirm these findings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a phase 3, global, multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, sequential design trial in which patients are randomly assigned to either placebo or 1.6 mg/kg ilofotase alfa. Randomisation is stratified by baseline modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mSOFA) score and trial site. The primary objective is to confirm the survival benefit with ilofotase alfa by demonstrating a reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality in patients with sepsis-associated AKI requiring vasopressors. A maximum of 1400 patients will be enrolled at ∼120 sites in Europe, North America, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. Up to four interim analyses will take place. Based on predefined decision rules, the trial may be stopped early for futility or for effectiveness. In addition, patients with COVID-19 disease and patients with 'moderate to severe' chronic kidney disease are analysed as 2 separate cohorts of 100 patients each. An independent Data Monitoring Committee evaluates safety data at prespecified intervals throughout the trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial is approved by relevant institutional review boards/independent ethics committees and is conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, guidelines of Good Clinical Practice, Code of Federal Regulations and all other applicable regulations. Results of this study will determine the potential of ilofotase alfa to reduce mortality in critically ill patients with sepsis-associated AKI and will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT CT Number 2019-0046265-24. US IND Number 117 605 Pre-results. CLINICALTRIALS: gov number: NCT04411472.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.020

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.356 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicAlkaline Phosphatase Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207