4.4 Article

Background incidence of liver chemistry abnormalities in a clinical trial population without underlying liver disease

Journal

REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 52, Issue 2, Pages 85-88

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2008.06.001

Keywords

Liver function tests; Statistics and numerical data (epidemiology); Clinical trial subjects

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The FDA has recently proposed pre-marketing liver chemistry subject stopping criteria. The study was undertaken to determine the background rates of liver chemistry abnormalities in clinical trial populations without underlying liver disease. Methods: Data from 28 Phase II-IV trials in diseases with normal risk of underlying liver abnormalities were included. Information on 18,672 subjects, mean age of 44.3 years and 92.3% female was available. Prevalence and incidence of abnormal liver chemistries were calculated. Results: At baseline, the overall prevalence of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevations of 3 x ULN (upper limit of normal) and 5 x ULN was 0.08% and 0.01%, respectively. The prevalence of liver chemistry abnormalities was similar at study entry and exit. Overall, elevated liver chemistry incidence rates per 10,000 person months were 6.5 (95% CI 4.8; 8.5) for ALT 3 x ULN, 2.6 (1.6; 4.0) for ALT 5 x ULN, 0.3 (0.03; 0.9) for ALT 8 x ULN, 0.09 (0.04; 0.2) for alkaline phosphatase (ALP) 2 x ULN, and 0 for combined ALT + bilirubin elevation. Conclusion: Elevations of ALT (3 x ULN) and ALP (2 x ULN) are rare in clinical trial populations without underlying liver disease and can be considered a safety signal. No events of ALT 3 x ULN with concomitant bilirubin 1.5 x ULN were noted. These analyses create a liver chemistry evidence base in normal risk clinical trial populations. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available