MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389166630 · doi:10.1016/j.jhepr.2023.100975

Safety, pharmacodynamics, and antiviral activity of selgantolimod in viremic patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection

2023· article· en· W4389166630 on OpenAlexaff
Harry L.A. Janssen, Young‐Suk Lim, Hyung Joon Kim, Leonard Sowah, Cheng‐Hao Tseng, Carla S. Coffin, Magdy Elkhashab, Sang Hoon Ahn, Anh‐Hoa Nguyen, Diana Chen, Jeffrey J. Wallin, Simon P. Fletcher, Circe E. McDonald, Jenny C. Yang, Anuj Gaggar, Diana M. Brainard, Scott Fung, Yoon Jun Kim, Jia‐Horng Kao, Wan‐Long Chuang, Anna E. S. Brooks, P. Rod Dunbar

Bibliographic record

VenueJHEP Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatitis B Virus Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Liver CentreUniversity of CalgaryToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersEisaiGilead SciencesBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineHBeAgTenofovir alafenamideClinical endpointPharmacodynamicsHBsAgAdverse effectGastroenterologyPlaceboHepatitis B virusViral loadImmunologyClinical trialPharmacokineticsVirusPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background & aimsNovel finite therapies for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) are needed, since current oral antivirals require prolonged treatment. This Phase 2 study (NCT03615066) evaluated safety, pharmacodynamics, and antiviral activity of selgantolimod (a toll-like receptor 8 agonist) with tenofovir alafenamide (TAF).MethodsViremic patients with CHB not receiving treatment were stratified by HBeAg status and randomized 2:2:1 to TAF 25 mg/day with selgantolimod 3 mg orally once weekly (QW), selgantolimod 1.5 mg QW, or placebo. Combination therapy continued until week (W)24, followed by TAF monotherapy until W48; patients then discontinued TAF and were followed until W96 (treatment-free follow-up [TFFU] period). The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion with ≥1 log10 IU/mL HBsAg decline at W24.ResultsSixty-seven patients received study drug; 27 were followed during TFFU. Nausea, headache, vomiting, fatigue, and dizziness were the most common adverse events (AEs). Most AEs were Grade 1. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) flares were not observed up to W48. Four patients experienced ALT and hepatitis flares during TFFU; all had HBV DNA increases. Selgantolimod increased serum cytokines and chemokines and redistributed several circulating immune cell subsets. No patients achieved the primary efficacy endpoint. HBsAg mean changes were −0.12, −0.16, and −0.12 log10 IU/mL HBsAg in the selgantolimod 3-mg, selgantolimod 1.5-mg, and placebo groups at W48, respectively; HBV DNA declined in all groups by ≥2 log10 IU/mL as early as W2, with all groups rebounding to baseline during TFFU. No HBsAg or HBeAg loss or seroconversion was observed throughout TFFU.ConclusionsSelgantolimod up to 3 mg was safe and well tolerated. Pharmacodynamics and antiviral activity in viremic patients support continued study of selgantolimod in combination CHB therapies.Impact and implicationsNovel therapeutics for chronic HBV infection are needed to achieve a functional cure. In this study, we confirmed the safety and tolerability of selgantolimod (formerly GS-9688, a toll-like receptor 8 agonist) when initiated with tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) over 24 weeks in patients infected with viremic chronic HBV. Overall, declines in HBsAg levels with selgantolimod treatment were modest; subgroup analysis indicated that patients with alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels greater than the upper limit of normal had significantly greater declines compared with those with normal ALT levels (–0.20 vs –0.03 log10 IU/mL; p <0.001). These findings suggest a potential differential response to selgantolimod based on patients’ baseline HBV-specific immune response, which should be considered in future investigations characterizing the underlying mechanisms of selgantolimod treatment and in HBV cure studies using similar immunomodulatory pathways.Clinical trial numberNCT03615066.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJHEP ReportsSame topicHepatitis B Virus StudiesFrench-language works237,207