Safety and Tolerability of Inclisiran for Treatment of Hypercholesterolemia in 7 Clinical Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inclisiran is a small interfering RNA agent to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to provide reliable evidence to date on the long-term safety profile of inclisiran. METHODS: This post hoc analysis comprised patients treated with 300 mg inclisiran sodium or placebo in the completed (ORION-1, -3, -5, -9, -10, and -11) and ongoing (ORION-8) trials. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates and Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative incidence of reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE), abnormal laboratory measurements, and incidence of antidrug antibodies were analyzed. RESULTS: This analysis included 3,576 patients treated with inclisiran for up to 6 years and 1,968 patients treated with placebo for up to 1.5 years, with 9,982.1 and 2,647.7 patient-years of exposure, respectively. Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups. Kaplan-Meier analyses showed that TEAEs that were serious or led to discontinuation; hepatic, muscle, and kidney events; incident diabetes; and elevations of creatine kinase or creatinine accrued at a comparable rate between groups for up to 1.5 years, with similar trends continuing for inclisiran beyond this period. Numerically fewer major cardiovascular events reported as TEAEs occurred with inclisiran during this period. Treatment-induced antidrug antibodies were uncommon with inclisiran (4.6%), with few of these persistent (1.4%) and not associated with greater incidence of TEAEs leading to study drug discontinuation or serious TEAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment with inclisiran was well tolerated in a diverse population, without new safety signals, supporting the safety of inclisiran in patients with dyslipidemia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".