Cited by 11Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthPeroxisome Proliferator-Activated ReceptorsLipid metabolism and disorders

Efficacy of Pemafibrate Versus Fenofibrate Administration on Serum Lipid Levels in Patients with Dyslipidemia: Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Khan, Muhammad Shayan, Ghumman, Ghulam Mujtaba, Baqi, Abdul, Shah, Jay, Aziz, Muhammad, Mir, Tanveer, Tahir, Ayesha, Katragadda, Srinivas +3 more·2023·American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs

Abstract

Background Pemafibrate is a novel fibrate class drug that is a highly potent and selective agonist of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPARα). We performed the first ever network meta-analysis containing the largest ever group of patients to test the efficacy of pemafibrate in improving lipid levels compared with fenofibrate and placebo in patients with dyslipidemia. Methods Potentially relevant clinical trials were identified in Medline, PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane Controlled Trials registry. Nine randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria out of 40 potentially available articles. The primary effect outcome was a change in the levels of triglycerides (TG), high-density lipoproteins (HDL), or low-density lipoproteins (LDL) before and after the treatment. Results A total of 12,359 subjects were included. The mean patient age was 54.73 (years), the mean ratio for female patients was 18.75%, and the mean examination period was 14.22 weeks. The dose for pemafibrate included in our study was 0.1, 0.2, or 0.4 mg twice daily, whereas the dose for fenofibrate was 100 mg/day. Data showed a significant reduction in TG and a mild increase in HDL levels across the pemafibrate group at different doses and fenofibrate 100 mg group (with greatest effect observed with pemafibrate 0.1 mg twice daily). A mild increase in LDL was also observed in all groups, but the increase in LDL in the 0.1 mg twice daily dose group was statistically insignifican…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40256-023-00593-6

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 54 · Cited by 11

Authors
Khan, M. S., Ghumman, G. M., Baqi, A., Shah, J., Aziz, M., Mir, T., Tahir, A., Katragadda, S., Singh, H., Taleb, M., & Ali, S. S.
Affiliations
  • Mercy St. Vincent Medical Center (US)
  • University of Toledo (US)
  • Wayne State University (US)
Corresponding author
Ghumman, Ghulam Mujtaba
Venue
American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs
Published
2023-07-31
Volume
23
Issue
5
Pages
547-558
ISSN
  • 1175-3277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1179-187X
OpenAlex
W4385410022
Cited by
11
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3
FWCI
0.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Lipid metabolism and disorders
Keywords
pemafibrate, fenofibrate, dyslipidemia, serum lipids, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, PPARα agonist, fibrate drugs, dose comparison, hypertriglyceridemia
MeSH terms
Network Meta-Analysis, Hypolipidemic Agents, Benzoxazoles, Butyrates, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Fenofibrate, Triglycerides, Dyslipidemias

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review