Efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia: analysis of pooled patient-level data from phase 3 clinical trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) often cannot reach guideline-recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals despite multidrug therapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid as an add-on therapy for lowering LDL-C in patients with HeFH. METHODS: Pooled data from two 52-week phase 3 clinical trials of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or HeFH receiving maximally tolerated statin therapy (randomized 2:1 to bempedoic acid or placebo) were analyzed by HeFH status. Endpoints included changes from baseline to week 12 (and up to week 52) in LDL-C and other lipid parameters, achievement of LDL-C goals, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 217 (bempedoic acid, 146; placebo, 71) patients with HeFH and 2,792 (bempedoic acid, 1,864; placebo, 928) without HeFH were included (mean baseline LDL-C, 172.8 mg/dL and 102.6 mg/dL, respectively). Bempedoic acid significantly lowered LDL-C at week 12 vs. placebo regardless of HeFH status (with HeFH, -21.2%; without HeFH, -18.2% [both P<0.0001]). Bempedoic acid significantly reduced other lipid parameters and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein vs. placebo regardless of HeFH status (all P≤0.01). Among patients with HeFH treated with bempedoic acid, 32% and 27% achieved LDL-C <100 mg/dL at weeks 12 and 52, respectively. Overall treatment-emergent adverse event incidence was comparable across all four groups (74.7-77.5%). CONCLUSION: Bempedoic acid significantly lowered LDL-C levels vs. placebo and was generally well tolerated in all patients, with no new safety findings in patients with HeFH, despite more intensive lipid-lowering therapy in patients with vs. without HeFH.
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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".