ArticleAmerican journal of preventive cardiology2026
Obicetrapib safety analysis: Pooled phase 3 clinical trial experience.
Article in American journal of preventive cardiology, 2026. 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.
- The future of CV prevention science depends on how we communicate: why simultaneous publication matters.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Obicetrapib is a potent, selective cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitor that lowers LDL-C and raises HDL-C. Although prior studies have demonstrated efficacy and general tolerability, a comprehensive evaluation of its safety profile across later-stage clinical trials is needed. Methods: Safety outcomes were assessed in a pooled analysis of two phase III trials comparing obicetrapib 10 mg daily with placebo in adults with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) or atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Participants received treatment for 365 days. Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and prespecified events of special interest including hepatic, muscular, glycemic, renal and ocular parameters as well as overall rates of discontinuation. Results: A total of 2,880 participants were included (mean age 64 years; 36 % female; 82 % with ASCVD; 35.8 % with diabetes). Overall TEAE rates were similar between obicetrapib and placebo (60.2 % vs 62.0 %). AEs leading to treatment discontinuation occurred in 4.1 % of obicetrapib-treated participants and 5.3 % on placebo, Risk Ratio (RR) 0.77 [0.54-1.08]. No clinically significant change in blood pressure was observed between groups and hypertension events were comparable. There was no difference between the groups in liver or muscle-related endpoints. Reduction in eGFR occurred less often with obicetrapib ( compared to placebo (6.7 % vs. 8.7 % RR 0.77 [0.59, 1.00])). Macular degeneration was reported once in the obicetrapib group (n= 1 [0.1 %]). Deaths were similar between treatment groups. No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: Obicetrapib demonstrated a favorable safety profile over 12 months, with AE rates comparable to placebo. These findings extend our understanding of the safety and tolerability of obicetrapib.
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.