Long‐Term Evaluation of Givinostat in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, and Natural History Comparisons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This ongoing, open-label extension study is evaluating the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of givinostat, a Class I and II histone deacetylase inhibitor, in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). METHODS: The recruited patients completed one of two prior clinical studies (one Phase 2 and one Phase 3 [EPIDYS]), receiving givinostat or placebo, or were successfully screened but not randomized into EPIDYS. All receive givinostat oral suspension open-label at a flexible, weight-based dose in addition to systemic corticosteroids, and attend visits every 4 months. RESULTS: A total of 194 patients are included in the current analyses, with a mean duration of givinostat exposure (excluding use in prior studies) of 559.6 days (SD 373.0); when including use in the prior studies, the maximum exposure to givinostat was > 8 years. Although the majority of patients reported ≥ 1 adverse event (169/194 [87.1%]), most were mild/moderate in severity, and the safety profile of givinostat was consistent with prior studies. Post hoc comparisons with natural history datasets (ImagingDMD and CINRG) suggest, in propensity matched populations, givinostat added to systemic corticosteroids significantly delayed the loss of the ability to rise from the floor, the loss of the ability to complete the 4-stair climb test, and the loss of ambulation (by medians of 2.0-3.3 years; all nominal p < 0.05). INTERPRETATION: Overall, the safety and tolerability of long-term administration of givinostat in patients with DMD was consistent with previous studies. Comparisons with natural history data suggest that givinostat delays the occurrence of major disease progression milestones. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2017-000397-10; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03373968.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".