EXACT Trial: Results of the Phase 1 Dose-Escalation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: New therapies are needed for patients with refractory angina. Encoberminogene rezmadenovec (XC001), a novel adenoviral-5 vector coding for all 3 major isoforms of VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor), demonstrated enhanced local angiogenesis in preclinical models; however, the maximal tolerated dose and safety of direct epicardial administration remain unknown. METHODS: In the phase 1 portion of this multicenter, open-label, single-arm, dose-escalation study, patients with refractory angina received increasing doses of encoberminogene rezmadenovec (1×10 9 , 1×10 10 , 4×10 10 , and 1×10 11 viral particles) to evaluate its safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy. Patients had class II to IV angina on maximally tolerated medical therapy, demonstrable ischemia on stress testing, and were angina-limited on exercise treadmill testing. Patients underwent minithoracotomy with epicardial delivery of 15 0.1-mL injections of encoberminogene rezmadenovec. The primary outcome was safety via adverse event monitoring over 6 months. Efficacy assessments included difference from baseline to months 3, 6 (primary), and 12 in total exercise duration, myocardial perfusion deficit using positron emission tomography, angina class, angina frequency, and quality of life. RESULTS: From June 2, 2020 to June 25, 2021, 12 patients were enrolled into 4 dosing cohorts with 1×10 11 viral particle as the highest planned dose. Seventeen serious adverse events were reported in 7 patients; none were related to study drug. Six serious adverse events in 4 patients were related to the thoracotomy, 3 non–serious adverse events were possibly related to study drug. The 2 lowest doses did not demonstrate improvements in total exercise duration, myocardial perfusion deficit, or angina frequency; however, there appeared to be improvements in all parameters with the 2 higher doses. CONCLUSIONS: Epicardial delivery of encoberminogene rezmadenovec via minithoracotomy is feasible, and up to 1×10 11 viral particle appears well tolerated. A dose response was observed across 4 dosing cohorts in total exercise duration, myocardial perfusion deficit, and angina class. The highest dose (1×10 11 viral particle) was carried forward into phase 2. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT04125732.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".