ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2025
A Case Study of Model-Informed Drug Development of a Novel PCSK9 Antisense Oligonucleotide. Part 2: Phase 2 to Phase 3.
Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this second part of a case study on the practical use of model-informed drug development (MIDD), we describe the clinical development of AZD8233, a novel proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) antisense oligonucleotide, from phase 2b to the start of phase 3. The case study exemplifies the use of MIDD to answer key design questions for the phase 3 program, including the design of a pivotal phase 3 study, a head-to-head study, and a cardiovascular outcome study informed by model-averaging analysis. Extensive phase 3 study simulations assessed the impact of drop-out, readout timing, dose frequency, and analysis method on study outcomes. The final phase 3 design assumed around 1% monthly drop-out (based on other PCSK9 inhibitor trials), used an EMA/FDA-approved analysis method, and set the primary readout at week 16. A simulated study predicted a reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) by week 16 of -69% with AZD8233 60 mg every 4 weeks. A virtual head-to-head study showed AZD8233 lowered LDL-C by 27% more than an active competitor (inclisiran) at day 270. Predicted cardiovascular relative risk reduction (RRR) for AZD8233 on top of statins ranged from 24% to 49% based on model choice; a model-averaging approach predicted an RRR of 27% assuming 63% LDL-C reduction from a 130 mg/dL baseline. This case study highlights the importance of cross-functional collaboration and other key MIDD enablers to ensure that MIDD extends beyond a simple simulation exercise and is instead considered an integral part of drug development dedicated to quantitative decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.