MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402021304 · doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2024.08.039

Efficacy and safety of macitentan in Fontan-palliated patients: 52-week randomized, placebo-controlled RUBATO Phase 3 trial and open-label extension

2024· article· en· W4402021304 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Clift, Felix Berger, Lars Søndergaard, Petra Antonová, Patrick Disney, Jeremy Nicolarsen, Jean‐Benoît Thambo, Lidia Tomkiewicz Pająk, Jou-kou Wang, Annette Schophuus Jensen, Michela Efficace, Michael Friberg, D. A. Häberle, Verena Walter, Yves d’Udekem

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsAbbott (Canada)
FundersActelion Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboEndothelin receptor antagonistOpen labelRandomized controlled trialAntagonistDouble blindInternal medicineAnesthesiaReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The efficacy and safety of macitentan, an endothelin receptor antagonist, were assessed in a 52-week, prospective, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study assessing the efficacy and safety of macitentan in Fontan-palliated adult and adolescent patients (RUBATO-DB) and an open-label extension trial (RUBATO-OL). METHODS: Patients aged 12 years and older with New York Heart Association functional class II or III underwent total cavopulmonary connection more than 1 year before screening and showed no signs of Fontan failure/clinical deterioration. In RUBATO-DB, the primary efficacy end point was change in peak oxygen consumption from baseline to week 16; secondary end points were change from baseline over 52 weeks in peak oxygen consumption and change in mean count/minute of daily physical activity via accelerometer from baseline to week 16. Safety was assessed throughout both studies. RESULTS: In RUBATO-DB, 137 patients were randomized to macitentan 10 mg (n = 68) or placebo (n = 69); 92.7% completed 52-week double-blind treatment. At week 16, mean ± SD change in peak oxygen consumption was -0.16 ± 2.86 versus -0.67 ± 2.66 mL/kg/minute with macitentan versus placebo (median unbiased treatment difference estimate, 0.62 mL/kg/minute [99% repeated CI, -0.62 to 1.85]; P = .19). No treatment effect was observed in either of the secondary end points. During RUBATO-DB, most common adverse events with macitentan were headache, nasopharyngitis, and pyrexia. Across RUBATO-DB and RUBATO-OL, most common adverse events were COVID-19, headache, and fatigue. RUBATO-OL was prematurely discontinued because RUBATO-DB did not meet its primary or secondary end point. CONCLUSIONS: The primary end point of RUBATO-DB was not met; macitentan did not improve exercise capacity versus placebo in patients with Fontan palliation. Macitentan was generally well tolerated over long-term treatment.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgerySame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207