Evaluation of the Effect of Momelotinib on Cardiac Repolarization: A Thorough QT Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A randomized, partially blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study in 48 healthy adults assessed the effect of momelotinib on the heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc) using the Fridericia formula (QTcF). QTc was evaluated for momelotinib 200 mg (therapeutic dose), momelotinib 800 mg (supratherapeutic dose), moxifloxacin 400 mg (positive control), and placebo. Pharmacokinetic profiles of momelotinib and its active metabolite M21 were evaluated. Momelotinib did not prolong QTcF, as the upper bounds of the 2-sided 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the mean difference between doses of momelotinib and placebo were <10 milliseconds at all time points. The lower limit of the 2-sided 98% CI for the mean difference in QTcF between moxifloxacin versus placebo was >5 milliseconds at 2, 3, and 4 hours after dosing, demonstrating assay sensitivity. There was no positive relationship between momelotinib plasma concentrations and QTcF. Adverse events (AEs) were more frequent with the supratherapeutic dose of momelotinib, but none were considered severe. There were no deaths, serious AEs, or AEs leading to study discontinuation. Neither therapeutic nor supratherapeutic doses of momelotinib led to clinically significant effects on the QTc interval, supporting a negative finding for QTc prolongation from this thorough QT study.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".