Table 1 Examples of abstracts assessed
Abstract with no mention of funding source and CoI | Abstract reporting funding source only | Abstract reporting funding source and CoI |
|---|---|---|
Efficacy and safety of experimental treatment A in combination with treatment B and treatment c in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. | Efficacy and safety of experimental treatment A in combination with treatment B and treatment c in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. | Efficacy and safety of experimental treatment A in combination with treatment B and treatment c in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. |
AUTHORS: Thomson MR; Cook A; Pettigrew GE; Bower G; Bishop D; Potter LM; Alyn JC | AUTHORS: Thomson MR; Cook A; Pettigrew GE; Bower G; Bishop D; Potter LM; Alyn JC | AUTHORS: Thomson MR; Cook A; Pettigrew GE; Bower G; Bishop D; Potter LM; Alyn JC |
BACKGROUND: Treatment B and treatment C combination therapy may be insufficient to improve lipid and nonlipid parameters beyond low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. | BACKGROUND: Treatment B and treatment C combination therapy may be insufficient to improve lipid and nonlipid parameters beyond low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. | BACKGROUND: Treatment B and treatment C combination therapy may be insufficient to improve lipid and nonlipid parameters beyond low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. |
METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind study, a total of 543 patients with triglycerides >/=150 mg/dL and <400 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) <40 mg/dL (<50 mg/dL for women), and LDL-C >/=130 mg/dL were randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with experimental treatment A 135 mg or placebo, each coadministered with treatment B 40 mg + treatment C 10 mg (treatment BC). | METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind study, a total of 543 patients with triglycerides >/=150 mg/dL and <400 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) <40 mg/dL (<50 mg/dL for women), and LDL-C >/=130 mg/dL were randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with experimental treatment A 135 mg or placebo, each coadministered with treatment B 40 mg + treatment C 10 mg (treatment BC). | METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind study, a total of 543 patients with triglycerides >/=150 mg/dL and <400 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) <40 mg/dL (<50 mg/dL for women), and LDL-C >/=130 mg/dL were randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with experimental treatment A 135 mg or placebo, each coadministered with treatment B 40 mg + treatment C 10 mg (treatment BC). |
RESULTS: Both treatment regimens lowered LDL-C by >50%; however, experimental treatment A and treatment BC resulted in significantly (P < .001) greater improvements in HDL-C (13.0% vs 4.2%), triglycerides (-57.3% vs -39.7%), non-HDL-C (-55.6% vs -51.0%), and apoprotein B (-49.1% vs -44.7%) compared with treatment BC. Overall, adverse events were similar in the 2 treatment groups. No unexpected muscle, hepatic, or renal safety signals were identified with either treatment combination. | RESULTS: Both treatment regimens lowered LDL-C by >50%; however, experimental treatment A and treatment BC resulted in significantly (P < .001) greater improvements in HDL-C (13.0% vs 4.2%), triglycerides (-57.3% vs -39.7%), non-HDL-C (-55.6% vs -51.0%), and apoprotein B (-49.1% vs -44.7%) compared with treatment BC. Overall, adverse events were similar in the 2 treatment groups. No unexpected muscle, hepatic, or renal safety signals were identified with either treatment combination. | RESULTS: Both treatment regimens lowered LDL-C by >50%; however, experimental treatment A and treatment BC resulted in significantly (P < .001) greater improvements in HDL-C (13.0% vs 4.2%), triglycerides (-57.3% vs -39.7%), non-HDL-C (-55.6% vs -51.0%), and apoprotein B (-49.1% vs -44.7%) compared with treatment BC. Overall, adverse events were similar in the 2 treatment groups. No unexpected muscle, hepatic, or renal safety signals were identified with either treatment combination. |
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mixed dyslipidemia, the combination of experimental treatment A + treatment BC significantly improved lipid and nonlipid parameters compared with treatment BC and was generally well tolerated. | CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mixed dyslipidemia, the combination of experimental treatment A + treatment BC significantly improved lipid and nonlipid parameters compared with treatment BC and was generally well tolerated. | CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mixed dyslipidemia, the combination of experimental treatment A + treatment BC significantly improved lipid and nonlipid parameters compared with treatment BC and was generally well tolerated. |
FUNDING: Abbott. | FUNDING: Abbott. | |
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: MRT, AC and GEP declared financial interest and/or other relationships with Abbott. GB, DB, LMP and JCA are employees of Abbott. |