MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416067048 · doi:10.1681/asn.2025jrajce29

Prespecified Analysis of Expanded Safety Outcomes of Ravulizumab in IgAN from the SANCTUARY Trial

2025· article· en· W4416067048 on OpenAlexaff
Roberta Fenoglio, Min Yee, I−Ru Chen, David Philibert, Jessica Kaufeld, Sung Gyun Kim, Cory Williams, Kara Rice, Andreas Kateifides, Youssef M.K. Farag, Jonathan Barratt, Richard A. Lafayette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicComplement system in diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKidney diseaseClinical trialMEDLINENephropathy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Ravulizumab (RAV), a complement C5 inhibitor, demonstrated clinically meaningful proteinuria reduction in the phase 2 SANCTUARY trial in IgA nephropathy (IgAN).1 Here, we report findings from a prespecified expanded safety analysis. Methods: The phase 2, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of RAV (IV q8w) in adults with IgAN (NCT04564339) included a 26-week randomized period (RAV [n=43]; placebo [PBO; n=23]). All patients then received open-label RAV during a 24-week extension period. Patients were required to be vaccinated against meningococcal infection. Results: In the randomized period, most adverse events (AEs) were mild (90.6%; 87/96) with RAV, similar to PBO (89.3%; 67/75) (Table). There were no AEs leading to withdrawal of study drug, meningococcal infections, or deaths. The majority of AEs (86.5%; 83/96) in the randomized period were assessed as unrelated to RAV. One serious AE occurred in the RAV arm, hospitalization due to COVID-19, assessed as unrelated to intervention. Overall, the incidence of infections was similar in the RAV and PBO arms (46.5% vs 43.5% of patients). The most common infections in the RAV arm were nasopharyngitis and COVID-19 (occurring in 11.6% and 9.3%, respectively), while the most common infections in the PBO arm were influenza (8.7%) and nasopharyngitis (4.3%). There was a low incidence of infusion-related reactions, 4.7% with RAV and 8.7% with PBO, and no cases of clinically relevant immunogenicity. Safety data in the extension period were similar to the randomized period. Conclusion: RAV was well-tolerated in patients with IgAN; no unexpected safety signals were observed. The safety data are consistent with the established RAV safety profile based on >37,000 patient-years of experience including four approved indications. 1. Lafayette R, et al. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2025;36(4):645–656. Funding: Commercial Support - Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease, Boston, MA, United States

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicComplement system in diseasesFrench-language works237,207