MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392543341 · doi:10.1182/blood.2023021864

Fitusiran prophylaxis in people with hemophilia A or B who switched from prior BPA/CFC prophylaxis: the ATLAS-PPX trial

2024· article· en· W4392543341 on OpenAlexaff
Gili Kenet, Beatrice Nolan, Bülent Zülfikar, Bülent Antmen, Peter Kampmann, Tadashi Matsushita, Chur-Woo You, Kateryna Vilchevska, Catherine Bagot, Azizan Sharif, Flora Peyvandi, Guy Young, Claude Négrier, Jiarui Chi, Barbara Kittner, Christian Sussebach, Fadi Shammas, Baisong Mei, Shauna Andersson, Kaan Kavaklı

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsSanofi (Canada)
FundersGenentechGrifolsSwedish Orphan BiovitrumCSL BehringBiogenNovo NordiskSanofiChugai PharmaceuticalPfizer
KeywordsMedicineTolerabilityPre-exposure prophylaxisAdverse effectClinical endpointInternal medicineHemostasisSurgeryClinical trialImmunologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Fitusiran, a subcutaneous investigational small interfering RNA therapeutic, targets antithrombin to rebalance hemostasis in people with hemophilia A or B (PwHA/B), irrespective of inhibitor status. This phase 3, open-label study evaluated the efficacy and safety of fitusiran prophylaxis in males aged ≥12 years with hemophilia A or B, with or without inhibitors, who received prior bypassing agent (BPA)/clotting factor concentrate (CFC) prophylaxis. Participants continued their prior BPA/CFC prophylaxis for 6 months before switching to once-monthly 80 mg fitusiran prophylaxis for 7 months (onset and efficacy periods). Primary end point was annualized bleeding rate (ABR) in the BPA/CFC prophylaxis and fitusiran efficacy period. Secondary end points included spontaneous ABR (AsBR) and joint ABR (AjBR). Safety and tolerability were assessed. Of 80 enrolled participants, 65 (inhibitor, n = 19; noninhibitor, n = 46) were eligible for ABR analyses. Observed median ABRs were 6.5 (interquartile range [IQR], 2.2-19.6)/4.4 (IQR, 2.2-8.7) with BPA/CFC prophylaxis vs 0.0 (IQR, 0.0-0.0)/0.0 (IQR, 0.0-2.7) in the corresponding fitusiran efficacy period. Estimated mean ABRs were substantially reduced with fitusiran by 79.7% (P = .0021) and 46.4% (P = .0598) vs BPA/CFC prophylaxis, respectively. Forty-one participants (63.1%) experienced 0 treated bleeds with fitusiran vs 11 (16.9%) with BPAs/CFCs. Median AsBR and AjBR were both 2.2 with BPA/CFC prophylaxis and 0.0 in the fitusiran efficacy period. Two participants (3.0%) experienced suspected or confirmed thromboembolic events with fitusiran. Once-monthly fitusiran prophylaxis significantly reduced bleeding events vs BPA/CFC prophylaxis in PwHA/B, with or without inhibitors, and reported adverse events were generally consistent with previously identified risks of fitusiran. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03549871.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
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

Citations41
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207