4.7 Article

Randomised clinical trial: emricasan versus placebo significantly decreases ALT and caspase 3/7 activation in subjects with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

期刊

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
卷 49, 期 1, 页码 64-73

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apt.15030

关键词

-

资金

  1. Conatus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Lipotoxicity leading to excessive caspase-mediated apoptosis and inflammation is believed to drive liver damage in NAFLD. Emricasan is a pan-caspase inhibitor that decreased serum ALT and apoptotic and inflammatory markers in subjects with chronic hepatitis. Aims To assess whether 28 days of emricasan would reduce elevated levels of serum ALT, AST, cleaved cytokeratin-18, full-length cytokeratin-18, and caspase 3/7 in subjects with NAFLD and raised aminotransferases. Methods Double-blind, placebo-controlled, office-practice study assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of emricasan in subjects with NAFLD and ALT levels >= 1.5 x ULN during screening. Subjects were randomised to emricasan 25 mg twice daily or matching placebo. Subjects with cirrhosis and other causes for raised aminotransferases were excluded. The primary endpoint was the change in ALT at day 28 in the emricasan group vs placebo. Results 38 subjects were randomised, 19 each to emricasan or placebo. Baseline disease factors were well balanced except for lower median ALT values in emricasan subjects. Three subjects randomised to placebo discontinued prior to day 28. ALT values decreased significantly in emricasan-treated subjects vs placebo at days 7 (P < 0.0001) and 28 (P = 0.02). cCK18 (day 7), flCK18 (days 7 and 28), and caspase 3/7 (day 7) were also significantly decreased in emricasan-treated subjects vs placebo. Emricasan treatment was generally safe and well tolerated. Conclusions Emricasan decreased ALT and biomarkers in subjects with NAFLD and raised aminotransferases after 28 days. These results support the further development of emricasan in patients with NAFLD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据