MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403198657 · doi:10.1111/all.16351

Long‐term safety and efficacy of garadacimab for preventing hereditary angioedema attacks: Phase 3 open‐label extension study

2024· article· en· W4403198657 on OpenAlexaff
Avner Reshef, Connie Hsu, Constance H. Katelaris, Philip H. Li, Markus Magerl, Keiko Yamagami, Mar Guilarte, Paul K. Keith, Jonathan A. Bernstein, John‐Philip Lawo, H. Shekar Shetty, Maressa Pollen, Lolis Wieman, Tim J. Craig

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and Angioedema
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersCSL Behring
KeywordsHereditary angioedemaMedicineOpen labelTerm (time)DermatologyAngioedemaIntensive care medicinePediatricsAdverse effectInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a chronic, unpredictable disease. Long-term prophylactic treatments that offer durable efficacy, safety, and convenience are required to assist patients in achieving complete disease control, per international guidelines. We report an interim analysis of an ongoing phase 3 (VANGUARD) open-label extension (OLE) study evaluating the long-term safety and efficacy of garadacimab for HAE prophylaxis. METHODS: Adults and adolescents aged ≥12 years with HAE previously participating in phase 2 and pivotal phase 3 (VANGUARD) studies were rolled over to an OLE, alongside newly enrolled patients. Patients received garadacimab 200 mg subcutaneously, once monthly for ≥12 months. The primary endpoint was treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in patients with C1 inhibitor deficiency/dysfunction. RESULTS: At data cut-off (February 13, 2023; N = 161), median (interquartile range) exposure was 13.8 months (11.9-16.3). For the primary endpoint, 133/159 patients experienced ≥1 TEAE (524 events), equivalent to 0.23 events/administration and 2.84 events/patient-year. Garadacimab-related TEAEs (13% of patients, 52 events) were most commonly injection-site reactions (ISRs). No deaths occurred. One patient discontinued treatment due to garadacimab-related moderate ISR. Most TEAEs were mild/moderate; three events were serious (COVID-19, two events; abdominal HAE attack, one event) and not garadacimab related. No abnormal bleeding, thromboembolic, severe hypersensitivity, or anaphylactic events were observed. Mean HAE attack rate decreased by 95% from the run-in period; 60% of patients were attack-free. Almost all patients (93%) rated their response to garadacimab as "good" or "excellent." CONCLUSION: Garadacimab has a favorable safety profile suitable for long-term use and provides durable protection against HAE attacks.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations29
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergySame topicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and AngioedemaFrench-language works237,207