A phase 2b, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial of atacicept for treatment of IgA nephropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atacicept is a first-in-class, dual anti-B-cell Activation Factor–A Proliferation-Inducing Ligand fusion protein in clinical evaluation for treatment of IgA nephropathy. To compare efficacy and safety of atacicept versus placebo in patients with IgAN, this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b clinical trial ORIGIN enrolled 116 individuals with biopsy-proven IgA nephropathy. Participants were randomized to atacicept 150, 75, or 25 mg versus placebo once weekly for up to 36 weeks. Primary and key secondary endpoints were changes in urine protein creatinine ratio based on 24-hour urine collection at weeks 24 and 36, respectively, in the combined atacicept 150 mg and 75 mg group versus placebo. The primary endpoint was met at week 24 as the mean urine protein creatinine ratio was reduced from baseline by 31% in the combined atacicept group versus 8% with placebo, resulting in a significant 25% reduction with atacicept versus placebo. At week 36, the key secondary endpoint was met as the mean urine protein creatinine ratio reduced from baseline by 34% in the combined atacicept group versus a 2% increase with placebo, resulting in a significant 35% reduction with atacicept versus placebo. The reduction in proteinuria was accompanied by stabilization in endpoint eGFR with atacicept compared to a decline with placebo at week 36, resulting in significant between-group geometric mean difference of 11%, approximating an absolute difference of 5.7 mL/min/1.73m 2 . Endpoint galactose deficient IgA1 levels significantly decreased from baseline by 60% versus placebo. The safety profile of atacicept was like placebo. Thus, our results provide evidence to support a pivotal, phase 3 study of atacicept in IgA nephropathy.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".