MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416054854 · doi:10.1001/jama.2025.20620

Efficacy and Safety of Oral PCSK9 Inhibitor Enlicitide in Adults With Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia

2025· article· en· W4416054854 on OpenAlexafffund
Christie M. Ballantyne, Laura Gellis, Jean-Claude Tardif, Puja Banka, Ann Marie Návar, Emil Andreas Asprusten, Russell L. Scott, Erik S.G. Stroes, Samar Froman, Geraldine Mendizabal, Fan Wang, Alberico L. Catapano

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersInstitut de Cardiologie de MontréalPfizerEsperion TherapeuticsAmgen
KeywordsFamilial hypercholesterolemiaPCSK9Ldl cholesterolHeterozygote advantageLDL receptorProprotein convertaseCholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Persons with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) are at increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease due to lifelong elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Many patients with HeFH do not achieve guideline-recommended LDL-C goals with the currently available lipid-lowering therapies. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of enlicitide decanoate (an oral proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor) vs placebo in adults with HeFH requiring further lowering of LDL-C levels despite use of statin therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 3, randomized clinical trial included persons aged 18 years or older with HeFH currently using lipid-lowering therapy (taking at least a moderate- or high-intensity statin) and either an LDL-C level of 55 mg/dL or greater and a history of major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or an LDL-C level of 70 mg/dL or greater without a history of major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The trial was conducted at 59 sites across 17 countries; the first participant was screened on August 8, 2023, and the last follow-up visit occurred on April 7, 2025. Interventions: Participants were randomized (2:1) to 20 mg of enlicitide (n = 202) or placebo (n = 101) once daily for 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the mean percentage change in LDL-C level at week 24. The secondary outcomes included the mean percentage change in LDL-C level at week 52, the mean percentage change at week 24 in levels of non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and apolipoprotein B, and the median percentage change at week 24 in lipoprotein(a). Results: Of the 303 participants (mean age, 52.4 [SD, 13.5] years; 51% were female) randomized, 293 (96.7%) completed the trial. The mean LDL-C level was 119.0 mg/dL (SD, 41.0 mg/dL) at baseline, all had statin current use (81.5% were taking a high-intensity statin), and 64.4% were taking ezetimibe. The mean percentage change in LDL-C level at week 24 was -58.2% in the enlicitide group vs 2.6% in the placebo group (between-group difference, -59.4% [95% CI, -65.6% to -53.2%]; P < .001). The mean percentage change in LDL-C level at week 52 was -55.3% in the enlicitide group vs 8.7% in the placebo group (between-group difference, -61.5% [95% CI, -69.4% to -53.7%]; P < .001). At week 24, the mean percentage change in non-HDL-C level was -52.3% in the enlicitide group vs 2.1% in the placebo group (between-group difference, -53.0% [95% CI, -58.5% to -47.4%]; P < .001), the mean percentage change in apolipoprotein B level was -48.2% vs 1.8%, respectively (between-group difference, -49.1% [95% CI, -54.0% to -44.3%]; P < .001), and the median percentage change in lipoprotein(a) level was -24.7% vs -1.6% (between-group difference, -27.5% [95% CI, -34.3% to -20.6%]; P < .001). The incidence of adverse events, serious adverse events, and study discontinuation due to adverse events was similar between groups. Conclusions: Among adults with HeFH, treatment with enlicitide was well tolerated and significantly reduced levels of LDL-C, apolipoprotein B, non-HDL-C, and lipoprotein(a). Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05952869.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations42
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207