Cited by 184Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated ReceptorsLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthLipid metabolism and disorders

Efficacy and safety of pemafibrate (K-877), a selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α modulator, in patients with dyslipidemia: Results from a 24-week, randomized, double blind, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

Open access
Ishibashi, Shun, Arai, Hidenori, Yokote, Koutaro, Araki, Eiichi, Suganami, Hideki, Yamashita, Shizuya·2018·Journal of Clinical Lipidology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To overcome the concerns associated with the use of fibrates, pemafibrate (K-877), a novel selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor modulator, was developed. In a previous phase 2 trial, we showed excellent efficacy and safety of pemafibrate in patients with dyslipidemia. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pemafibrate over 24 weeks in adults with dyslipidemia in comparison with fenofibrate. METHODS: In this multicenter, 24-week, double-blind, clinical study, 225 patients with high triglyceride (TG; ≥150 mg/dL [1.7 mmol/L] and <500 mg/dL [5.7 mmol/L]) and relatively low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (<50 mg/dL [1.3 mmol/L] in men or 55 mg/dL [1.4 mmol/L] in women) levels were randomized to receive either pemafibrate at 0.2 or 0.4 mg/d or fenofibrate 106.6 mg/d. RESULTS: Pemafibrate 0.2, 0.4 mg/d and fenofibrate significantly reduced TG levels from baseline by -46.2%, -45.9%, and -39.7%, respectively. As compared with fenofibrate, the least squares mean differences (95% confidence intervals) in TG were -6.5% (-12.0, -1.1) and -6.2% (-11.6, -0.8) in pemafibrate 0.2 and 0.4 mg/d respectively, which showed the superiority of these doses of pemafibrate to 106.6 mg/d of fenofibrate. The incidence rates of adverse drug reactions in pemafibrate groups (2.7% and 6.8%) were significantly lower than that in the fenofibrate group (23.7%). Pemafibrate significantly decreased alanine aminotransferase and gamma-glutamyltransferase levels, whereas fenofibrate increased both of them. The increments of serum creatinine and cystatin C were smaller in pemafibrate than those in fenofibrate. CONCLUSIONS: Pemafibrate was superior to fenofibrate in terms of serum TG-lowering effect and hepatic and renal safety.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jacl.2017.10.006

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Pemafibrate's triglyceride-lowering effects and safety profile appear generally comparable to existing agents (traditional fibrates).

    “When placed in the context of traditional fibrates, pemafibrate’s triglyceride-lowering effects and safety profile appear generally comparable to existing agents.”

    From Pemafibrate for hypertriglyceridemia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating efficacy and safety outcomes (2026) · cites this paper as [23]

    The Conclusions report that pemafibrate was superior to fenofibrate in triglyceride reduction and had substantially fewer adverse drug reactions, particularly those related to liver and kidney function. The study compares pemafibrate with fenofibrate, not traditional fibrates as a class, and its reported differences run contrary to describing their effects and safety as generally comparable. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Phase 2 studies showed that pemafibrate had greater triglyceride-lowering and HDL cholesterol-raising actions with fewer off-target effects than PPARα agonists such as fenofibrate.

    “Phase 2 studies have shown that, as compared with PPARα agonists such as fenofibrate, pemafibrate had greater triglyceride-lowering and HDL cholesterol-raising actions with fewer off-target effects. 9-14”

    From Triglyceride Lowering with Pemafibrate to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk (2022) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) reports that a phase 2 trial found pemafibrate lowered triglycerides to an equal or greater degree than fenofibrate, with fewer adverse effects. The Discussion (page unavailable) says its triglyceride and HDL-C effects were comparable to those in phase 2, but that superiority over fenofibrate was demonstrated for the first time in this phase 3 trial. The source therefore does not support attributing greater triglyceride-lowering and HDL-C-raising effects over fenofibrate to phase 2 studies. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Pemafibrate reduces triglyceride levels and improves other lipid levels.

    “Pemafibrate, a selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α modulator, reduces triglyceride levels and improves other lipid levels.”
  • In head-to-head clinical trials, pemafibrate had a generally lower incidence of hepatic and renal adverse events compared to fenofibrate.

    “with a generally lower incidence of hepatic and renal adverse events reported in these studies [23, 24]”
  • In head-to-head clinical trials, pemafibrate reduced triglyceride levels relative to fenofibrate.

    “In head-to-head clinical trials, pemafibrate was observed to reduce triglyceride levels relative to fenofibrate”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 48 · Cited by 184

Authors
Ishibashi, S., Arai, H., Yokote, K., Araki, E., Suganami, H., & Yamashita, S.
Affiliations
  • Jichi Medical University (JP)
  • National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology (JP)
  • Chiba University (JP)
  • Kumamoto University (JP)
  • Kowa (Japan) (JP)
  • Rinku General Medical Center (JP)
Corresponding author
Ishibashi, Shun
Venue
Journal of Clinical Lipidology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-01
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
173-184
ISSN
  • 1876-4789 (ISSN-L)
  • 1933-2874
OpenAlex
W2765263832
Cited by
184
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 13 · 2013: 1
FWCI
6.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of clinical lipidology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Eli Lilly Japan
  • Shionogi
  • Boehringer Ingelheim Japan
  • Taisho Toyama Pharmaceutical Company
  • Daiichi-Sankyo
  • Otsuka Pharmaceutical
  • Kyowa Hakko Kirin
  • Ono Pharmaceutical
  • Takeda Pharmaceutical Company
  • Astellas Pharma
  • AstraZeneca
  • Novo Nordisk
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Lipid metabolism and disorders
Keywords
pemafibrate, fenofibrate, PPARα modulator, dyslipidemia, hypertriglyceridemia, low HDL cholesterol, triglyceride lowering, drug safety, adverse drug reactions, alanine aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transferase, serum creatinine, cystatin C, fibrates, lipid-lowering therapy, dose comparison
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Alanine Transaminase, Hypolipidemic Agents, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Drug Administration Schedule, Female, gamma-Glutamyltransferase, Humans, Cholesterol, HDL, Liver, Male, Middle Aged, Fenofibrate, Triglycerides, Treatment Outcome, PPAR alpha, 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