MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410264696 · doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2025.04.025

Safety and efficacy of elafibranor in primary sclerosing cholangitis: The ELMWOOD phase II randomized-controlled trial

2025· article· en· W4410264696 on OpenAlexaff
Cynthia Levy, George Abouda, Bahri M. Bilir, Alan Bonder, Christopher L. Bowlus, Isabel Campos‐Varela, Nora Cazzagon, Natasha Chandok, Kuldeep Cheent, Helena Cortez‐Pinto, Münevver Demir, Michael T. Dill, Bertus Eksteen, Jonathan M. Fenkel, Richard Gilroy, Hin Hin Ko, Ira M. Jacobson, Yiannis Kallis, Marcelo Kugelmas, Velimir A. Luketic, Alessandra Mangia, Aldo J. Montaño‐Loza, Ashis Mukhopadhya, Antonio Olveira, Bhaktasharan Patel, Antonello Pietrangelo, Faruq Pradhan, Magdalena Salcedo, Mitchell L. Shiffman, Kathrin Sprinzl, Rachael Swann, Douglas Thorburn, Paul J. Thuluvath, Palak Trivedi, Juan Turnés, Claudia O. Zein, Hugo Gomes da Silva, Seema Jaitly, Benjamin F. Miller, Aude Tavenard, Kris V. Kowdley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hepatology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Diseases and Immunity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of AlbertaWilliam Osler Health System
FundersIpsenAstellas PharmaNGM BiopharmaceuticalsIpsen BiopharmaceuticalsGilead SciencesNovo NordiskEisaiSanofiDr. Falk PharmaGlaxoSmithKlineAstraZeneca
KeywordsPrimary sclerosing cholangitisRandomized controlled trialMedicineInternal medicineGastroenterologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a rare, chronic liver disease. Elafibranor, a dual peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α/δ agonist, was investigated in the phase II ELMWOOD trial (NCT05627362). METHODS: This 12-week, double-blind trial enrolled adults with PSC and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) ≥1.5× the upper limit of normal. The primary endpoint was elafibranor safety vs. placebo. Additional endpoints included relative mean change from baseline in ALP and enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) score. RESULTS: A total of 68 participants (male: 54.4%; mean age: 46.3 years; inflammatory bowel disease: 55.9%) were randomized to elafibranor 80 mg (n = 22), elafibranor 120 mg (n = 23), or placebo (n = 23). At baseline, 70.6% were on ursodeoxycholic acid, 48.5% had ELF scores >9.8, and the mean ALP level was 369.5 U/L. At Week 12, rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and TEAEs leading to discontinuation in participants on elafibranor 80 mg, 120 mg, and placebo were 68.2%, 78.3%, and 69.6%, and 4.5%, 4.3%, and 8.7%, respectively. Serious TEAEs occurred only in participants on placebo (4.3%). Participants on elafibranor 80 mg and 120 mg had reductions in ALP vs. placebo (least squares mean treatment difference [95% CI]: -35.3% [-49.2, -21.4] and -54.7% [-68.3, -41.0], respectively). ALP normalization occurred only in participants on elafibranor 80 mg (9.1%) and 120 mg (17.4%). The LS mean treatment differences (95% CI) in change from baseline in ELF scores in participants on elafibranor 80 mg and 120 mg vs. placebo were -0.19 (-0.52, +0.15) and -0.28 (-0.62, +0.06), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Elafibranor was well tolerated in people with PSC and associated with greater biochemical improvements over 12 weeks compared with placebo. A greater magnitude of response was observed with elafibranor 120 mg compared with 80 mg. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: For people with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), there is a need for a well-tolerated and effective treatment that will enhance quality of life, prevent disease progression, and improve long-term outcomes. Here, we present results from the double-blind period of the phase II ELMWOOD trial in PSC, wherein elafibranor, a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α/δ agonist, demonstrated a favorable safety profile, provided greater biochemical improvements over 12 weeks compared with placebo, and appeared to stabilize markers of fibrosis and improve pruritus. These findings support larger and longer term investigations of elafibranor to explore its therapeutic potential as a treatment for people with PSC.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HepatologySame topicLiver Diseases and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207