Skip to content

Measure Liver Fat Content After ISIS 301012 (Mipomersen) Administration

A Phase 2, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Effect of Apolipoprotein B(ApoB) Reduction by ISIS 301012 on Liver Triglyceride Content in Subjects With Varying Degrees of Hyperlipidemia

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00362180
Enrollment
38
Registered
2006-08-09
Start date
2006-07-31
Completion date
2010-09-30
Last updated
2016-10-21

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Congenital Abnormalities, Dyslipidemias, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Hypercholesterolemia, Hyperlipidemias, Hypobetalipoproteinemias, Hypolipoproteinemia, Hypolipoproteinemias, Infant, Newborn, Diseases, Lipid Metabolism Disorders, Lipid Metabolism, Inborn Errors, Metabolic Diseases, Metabolic Disorder, Metabolism, Inborn Errors

Keywords

LDL-cholesterol, apoB-100, apoB-48, triglyceride, HeFH, FHBL

Brief summary

This study will assess what, if any, effect that ISIS 301012 (mipomersen) has on liver triglyceride content in multiple groups of subjects with varying degrees of risk for hepatic steatosis. In order to enroll subject groups with varying degrees of risk, the study has included multiple cohorts (Cohorts A-G). Additions and removal of cohorts has been accomplished with protocol amendments.

Detailed description

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to measure the effect of treatment with mipomersen on liver triglyceride (TG) content in patients with varying degrees of hyperlipidemia and risk for hepatic steatosis. The original study design included 4 cohorts (Cohorts A through D). Subsequent protocol amendments added 3 cohorts (Cohorts E, F, and G) to the study, truncated the enrollment of Cohort D, and eliminated Cohorts B and C. The study consisted of up to a 3-week screening period; a 4-week (Cohorts A and D), 13-week (Cohort E), or 52-week (Cohort G) treatment period; and a 20-week post-treatment follow-up period. Cohort F was an observational cohort, and therefore, was not treated with study drug. Patients in this cohort underwent a 15-week Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) and ultrasound evaluation period. The study cohorts are: Cohort A: Healthy volunteers with LDL-C \<140 mg/dL (3.6 mmol/L), serum TG \<200 mg/dL (2.3 mmol/L), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) \<6.0%, and hepatic TG content \<5% (as measured by MRS at screening). Patients were randomized to mipomersen 200 mg or placebo and treated for 4 weeks. Cohorts B+C were eliminated in a protocol amendment prior to enrolling any patients and are not discussed further. Cohort D: In an amendment to the protocol, Cohort D was closed to enrollment. One patient had already been enrolled in the study prior to the amendment. The patient enrolled in this cohort had impaired fasting glucose (defined as fasting blood glucose \>6 mmol/L and \<7 mmol/L) and mixed dyslipidemia (LDL-C \<215 mg/dL \[5.6 mmol/L\] and serum TG \>200 mg/dL \[2.3 mmol/L\]). The patient was treated with mipomersen 200 mg for 4 weeks. Cohort E: Patients with uncomplicated heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) (Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ≤1.5 \* upper limit of normal Upper limit of normal (ULN), no evidence of insulin resistance or metabolic syndrome, and hepatic TG content \<5% by MRS at screening). Patients were to remain on their baseline statin ± ezetimibe regimen but were to wash out from other lipid-lowering agents (e.g., fenofibrate, non-dietary omega-3 fatty acids, and niacin) at least 8 weeks prior to the MRS at screening. Patients were randomized to either mipomersen 200 mg or placebo for 13 weeks. Cohort F: Patients with familial hypobetalipoproteinemia (FHBL) (a documented APOB gene mutation that results in the expression of a truncated form of apo B). Patients in this cohort were evaluated by MRS, ultrasound, and laboratory tests; however, they were not treated with mipomersen or placebo. Cohort G: Patients with well-controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (HbA1c ≤8.0%), hypercholesterolemia (LDL-C \>100 mg/dL (2.59 mmol/L), and normal serum TG levels (≤200 mg/dL \[2.26 mmol/L\]). Patients were to have been on a stable dose of antidiabetic and lipid-lowering medications \>3 months prior to screening and were expected to remain stable for the duration of the study. Patients were randomized to either mipomersen 200 mg or placebo for 26 weeks, followed by 26 additional weeks of mipomersen 200 mg. Recruiting difficulties caused this cohort to close early.

Interventions

200 mg subcutaneous injections

DRUGPlacebo

subcutaneous injections

Sponsors

Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
Kastle Therapeutics, LLC
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Group A - are healthy subjects * Group D - has impaired fasting glucose and mixed dyslipidemia * Group E - has a diagnosis of Heterozygous Familial Hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) and on stable lipid-lowering therapy for 3 months * Group F - has a diagnosis of Familial Hypobetalipoproteinemia (FHBL) * Group G - has a diagnosis of Diabetes and hypercholesterolemia

Exclusion criteria

* Medical, surgical, laboratory or other conditions which in the judgment of the Physician Investigator would make the subject unsuitable for enrollment, or potentially interfere with subject participation or completion of the study.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Baseline, Day 26, Day 99Localized proton MRS was used to quantify liver TG concentration. All MRS imaging of the liver was performed using the same 1.5T scanner. The instructions were to cover the entire liver (from just above the dome to just below the inferior tip) using a qualified imaging technique (Yokoo, 2009, Radiology). Liver fat quantification was performed by determining the liver fat fraction (%) derived from MRS using selected Regions of Interest (ROI). The analyst typically looked for the branching of the right portal vein and mapped slices from one scan to the next. There were typically 2 ROIs in the right lobe and 1 in the left lobe. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging ROIs between different scans were selected using anatomical landmarks for both time points.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 26 and Day 99Samples were taken following an overnight fast.
Baseline Low-Density Lipoprotein CholesterolBaselineSamples were taken following overnight fast.
Baseline Apolipoprotein BBaselineSamples were taken following an overnight fast.
Baseline Total CholesterolBaselineSamples were taken following an overnight fast.
Percent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26 and Day 99Samples were taken following an overnight fast.
Percent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26 and Day 99Samples were taken following an overnight fast.

Countries

Netherlands

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Cohort A: Mipomersen
Healthy volunteers treated with 6 injections of mipomersen 200 mg over the course of 4 weeks.
4
Cohort A: Placebo
Healthy volunteers treated with 6 injections of placebo over the course of 4 weeks.
2
Cohort D: Mipomersen
Participants with impaired fasting glucose and mixed dyslipidemia who were treated with 6 injections of mipomersen 200 mg over the course of 4 weeks.
1
Cohort D: Placebo
Participants with impaired fasting glucose and mixed dyslipidemia who were treated with 6 injections of placebo over the course of 4 weeks.
0
Cohort E: Placebo
Participants with uncomplicated heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) treated with weekly placebo injections for 13 weeks.
11
Cohort E: Mipomersen
Participants with uncomplicated heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) treated with weekly mipomersen 200 mg injections for 13 weeks.
10
Cohort F: no Study Intervention
A reference group of participants with familial hypobetalipoproteinemia (FBHL) who did not receive a study intervention. Data gathered for 15 weeks.
6
Cohort G: Mipomersen
Participants with well-controlled Type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolemia, and normal triglyceride levels were treated with mipomersen 200 mg weekly for 26 weeks, followed by open-label mipomersen 200 mg weekly for an additional 26 weeks.
3
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by Mipomersen
Participants with well-controlled Type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolemia, and normal triglyceride levels were treated with placebo weekly for 26 weeks, followed by open-label mipomersen 200 mg weekly for an additional 26 weeks.
1
Total38

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002FG003FG004FG005FG006FG007FG008
Treated PeriodAdverse Event000001010
Treated PeriodWithdrawal by Subject100000000

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicTotalCohort A: MipomersenCohort A: PlaceboCohort D: MipomersenCohort E: PlaceboCohort E: MipomersenCohort F: no Study InterventionCohort G: MipomersenCohort G: Placebo Followed by Mipomersen
Age, Continuous53.5 years58.5 years40.5 years59.0 years46.0 years50.0 years49.5 years62.0 years58.0 years
Gender
Female
20 participants2 participants1 participants1 participants8 participants4 participants1 participants2 participants1 participants
Gender
Male
18 participants2 participants1 participants0 participants3 participants6 participants5 participants1 participants0 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
1 participants0 participants1 participants0 participants0 participants0 participants0 participants0 participants0 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
37 participants4 participants1 participants1 participants11 participants10 participants6 participants3 participants1 participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
14 / 1419 / 193 / 6
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 141 / 190 / 6

Outcome results

Primary

Change From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)

Localized proton MRS was used to quantify liver TG concentration. All MRS imaging of the liver was performed using the same 1.5T scanner. The instructions were to cover the entire liver (from just above the dome to just below the inferior tip) using a qualified imaging technique (Yokoo, 2009, Radiology). Liver fat quantification was performed by determining the liver fat fraction (%) derived from MRS using selected Regions of Interest (ROI). The analyst typically looked for the branching of the right portal vein and mapped slices from one scan to the next. There were typically 2 ROIs in the right lobe and 1 in the left lobe. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging ROIs between different scans were selected using anatomical landmarks for both time points.

Time frame: Baseline, Day 26, Day 99

Population: Full analysis set. In Cohort E: Placebo, Day 99 N=11 instead of 10 because participant did not have a post treatment MRS by Day 26.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Cohort A: PlaceboChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Baseline (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)0.2 percentage of total liver content
Cohort A: PlaceboChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 99 (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)NA percentage of total liver content
Cohort A: PlaceboChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 26 (Cohort E: Placebo n=10)0.3 percentage of total liver content
Cohort A: MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 99 (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)NA percentage of total liver content
Cohort A: MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 26 (Cohort E: Placebo n=10)0.3 percentage of total liver content
Cohort A: MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Baseline (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)1.2 percentage of total liver content
Cohort DChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 99 (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)NA percentage of total liver content
Cohort DChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Baseline (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)6.4 percentage of total liver content
Cohort DChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 26 (Cohort E: Placebo n=10)4.45 percentage of total liver content
Cohort E: PlaceboChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Baseline (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)0.8 percentage of total liver content
Cohort E: PlaceboChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 26 (Cohort E: Placebo n=10)0.1 percentage of total liver content
Cohort E: PlaceboChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 99 (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)-0.0 percentage of total liver content
Cohort E: MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 26 (Cohort E: Placebo n=10)0.1 percentage of total liver content
Cohort E: MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Baseline (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)1.1 percentage of total liver content
Cohort E: MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 99 (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)0.4 percentage of total liver content
Cohort F: no Study InterventionChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 26 (Cohort E: Placebo n=10)-1.2 percentage of total liver content
Cohort F: no Study InterventionChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Baseline (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)21.4 percentage of total liver content
Cohort F: no Study InterventionChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 99 (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)0.8 percentage of total liver content
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 26 (Cohort E: Placebo n=10)NA percentage of total liver content
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Baseline (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)2.6 percentage of total liver content
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 99 (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)-1.0 percentage of total liver content
Cohort G: MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Baseline (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)2.5 percentage of total liver content
Cohort G: MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 26 (Cohort E: Placebo n=10)NA percentage of total liver content
Cohort G: MipomersenChange From Baseline in Liver Triglyceride (TG) Content As Measured by Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS)Day 99 (Cohort E: Placebo n=11)7.8 percentage of total liver content
Comparison: The p-value is a comparison between the placebo group and the mipomersen group in Cohort E as a change from Baseline to Day 26.p-value: 0.7244exact Wilcoxon Rank-sum test
Comparison: The p-value is a comparison between the placebo group and the mipomersen group in Cohort E as a change from Baseline to Day 99.p-value: 0.0513exact Wilcoxon Rank-sum test
Secondary

Baseline Apolipoprotein B

Samples were taken following an overnight fast.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Cohort A: PlaceboBaseline Apolipoprotein B86 mg/wk
Cohort A: MipomersenBaseline Apolipoprotein B100.5 mg/wk
Cohort DBaseline Apolipoprotein B155 mg/wk
Cohort E: PlaceboBaseline Apolipoprotein B122.0 mg/wk
Cohort E: MipomersenBaseline Apolipoprotein B126.5 mg/wk
Cohort F: no Study InterventionBaseline Apolipoprotein B31.5 mg/wk
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenBaseline Apolipoprotein B120.0 mg/wk
Cohort G: MipomersenBaseline Apolipoprotein B113.0 mg/wk
Secondary

Baseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol

Samples were taken following overnight fast.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Cohort A: PlaceboBaseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol103.5 mg/wk
Cohort A: MipomersenBaseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol126.0 mg/wk
Cohort DBaseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol156.0 mg/wk
Cohort E: PlaceboBaseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol148.0 mg/wk
Cohort E: MipomersenBaseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol151.5 mg/wk
Cohort F: no Study InterventionBaseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol41.5 mg/wk
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenBaseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol147.0 mg/wk
Cohort G: MipomersenBaseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol121.0 mg/wk
Secondary

Baseline Total Cholesterol

Samples were taken following an overnight fast.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: Full analysis set

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Cohort A: PlaceboBaseline Total Cholesterol201.0 mg/wk
Cohort A: MipomersenBaseline Total Cholesterol207.0 mg/wk
Cohort DBaseline Total Cholesterol263.0 mg/wk
Cohort E: PlaceboBaseline Total Cholesterol208.0 mg/wk
Cohort E: MipomersenBaseline Total Cholesterol220.5 mg/wk
Cohort F: no Study InterventionBaseline Total Cholesterol107.0 mg/wk
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenBaseline Total Cholesterol231.0 mg/wk
Cohort G: MipomersenBaseline Total Cholesterol199.0 mg/wk
Secondary

Percent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99

Samples were taken following an overnight fast.

Time frame: Day 26 and Day 99

Population: Full analysis set with last observation carried forward.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Cohort A: PlaceboPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 99NA percent change
Cohort A: PlaceboPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-3.3 percent change
Cohort A: MipomersenPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 99NA percent change
Cohort A: MipomersenPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-20.8 percent change
Cohort DPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-41.6149 percent change
Cohort DPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 99NA percent change
Cohort E: PlaceboPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-1.1 percent change
Cohort E: PlaceboPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 996.0 percent change
Cohort E: MipomersenPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-1.8 percent change
Cohort E: MipomersenPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-16.3 percent change
Cohort F: no Study InterventionPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 994.1 percent change
Cohort F: no Study InterventionPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 263.6 percent change
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 26NA percent change
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-25.8 percent change
Cohort G: MipomersenPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 26NA percent change
Cohort G: MipomersenPercent Change in Apolipoprotein B From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-44.2 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99

Samples were taken following an overnight fast.

Time frame: Day 26 and Day 99

Population: Full analysis set with last observation carried forward.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Cohort A: PlaceboPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 261.1 percent change
Cohort A: PlaceboPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99NA percent change
Cohort A: MipomersenPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-14.3 percent change
Cohort A: MipomersenPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99NA percent change
Cohort DPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-41.7143 percent change
Cohort DPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99NA percent change
Cohort E: PlaceboPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-2.7 percent change
Cohort E: PlaceboPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 990.7 percent change
Cohort E: MipomersenPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-5.4 percent change
Cohort E: MipomersenPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-15.9 percent change
Cohort F: no Study InterventionPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 260.0 percent change
Cohort F: no Study InterventionPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 992.6 percent change
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-19.0 percent change
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26NA percent change
Cohort G: MipomersenPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26NA percent change
Cohort G: MipomersenPercent Change in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-33.9 percent change
Secondary

Percent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99

Samples were taken following an overnight fast.

Time frame: Day 26 and Day 99

Population: Full analysis set with last observation carried forward.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Cohort A: PlaceboPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-3.5 percent change
Cohort A: PlaceboPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99NA percent change
Cohort A: MipomersenPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-11.7 percent change
Cohort A: MipomersenPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99NA percent change
Cohort DPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-29.5374 percent change
Cohort DPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99NA percent change
Cohort E: PlaceboPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26-3.1 percent change
Cohort E: PlaceboPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-11.8 percent change
Cohort E: MipomersenPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 260.1 percent change
Cohort E: MipomersenPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-0.8 percent change
Cohort F: no Study InterventionPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 261.4 percent change
Cohort F: no Study InterventionPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-0.4 percent change
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-21.6 percent change
Cohort G: Placebo Followed by MipomersenPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26NA percent change
Cohort G: MipomersenPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 26NA percent change
Cohort G: MipomersenPercent Change in Total Cholesterol From Baseline to Day 99Day 99-21.6 percent change

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026