Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy of a Single Lorecivivint Injection in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Multicenter, Observational Extension Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lorecivivint (LOR), a CDC-like kinase/dual-specificity tyrosine kinase (CLK/DYRK) inhibitor thought to modulate inflammatory and Wnt pathways, is being developed as a potential intra-articular knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment. The objective of this trial was to evaluate long-term safety of LOR within an observational extension of two phase 2 trials. This 60-month, observational extension study (NCT02951026) of a 12-month phase 2a trial (NCT02536833) and 6-month phase 2b trial (NCT03122860) was administratively closed after 36 months as data inferences became limited. Participants received a single intra-articular LOR or placebo (PBO) injection at their parent-trial baseline. The primary outcome was the comparative incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs), with AEs and similar safety measures comprising secondary outcomes. A post hoc baseline-adjusted analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) compared changes from baseline in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain and Function subscores and medial joint space width (JSW) between LOR 0.07 mg and PBO groups in a subpopulation of participants with unilateral knee pain and widespread pain low enough to allow participants to differentiate their target knee pain. The safety analysis set for the extension study included 495 LOR-treated and 208 control participants, with 409 (82.6%) and 175 (84.1%) remaining at study close, respectively. There were 68 SAEs reported in 38 (5.4%) patients; none were considered treatment-related by investigators. The incidence of AEs was similar between groups. In the post hoc subgroup efficacy analyses, LOR 0.07 mg demonstrated greater mean improvements from baseline compared with PBO in WOMAC pain and function scores out to 12 months post-injection. No between-group differences in medial JSW were observed out to 18 months. LOR appeared generally safe and well tolerated. Efficacy analyses on the subset of completer patients demonstrated durable symptom improvements in WOMAC pain and function for at least 12 months compared to PBO after a single injection of LOR. NCT02951026. Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common degenerative joint disease and significantly impairs patients’ function and quality of life. Lorecivivint (LOR) is a drug candidate undergoing clinical trials as an injectable treatment for knee OA. It inhibits molecules in joint cells (called CLKs and DYRKs) that regulate inflammatory (affecting pain) and Wnt (affecting cartilage and bone turnover) pathways; abnormalities of both contribute to OA. We report data from patients with knee OA who completed two randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled trials and who chose to continue to be observed for up to 3 years. They did not receive any new LOR injections but continued to get regular exams and annual X-rays by their clinicians and to report any (new / ongoing) health problems. An analysis was performed matching patients with similar clinical features (especially regarding their knee pain) from both trials, to see if a 0.07 mg dose of LOR was safe and if it affected knee pain and function. LOR appeared to be well tolerated, with few side effects that were similar in number to those receiving the placebo. More patients in the LOR-treated group reported feeling less knee pain and improved function than those in the PBO group; however, because knee x-rays of patients in both LOR and PBO groups showed no worsening of their OA over this time period, the evidence remained inconclusive. The profound need for safe, disease-modifying OA treatments and the encouraging results from this study support the continued development of LOR as a treatment for knee osteoarthritis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".