
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Send us Fan Mail
This conversation starts with Quentin Anstee sharing the five key takeaways for NITs in general and NIT Best Practices he developed while preparing recent talks for the Liver Forum and the ICFL meeting in Vienna:
(1) As we have discussed on this podcast and elsewhere, trial endpoints around balloon hepatocytes are, in Quentin's words, "not sufficiently robust."
(2) Rapidly attaining response from a given test (ALT, for example) is not necessarily a guarantee of early efficacy.
(3) "Simple indirect biomarker panels like FIB-4" need to be interpreted with caution.
(4) Since we do not have a single perfect gold standard test (neither histological nor non-invasive), we should consider a standard for clinical trial assessment that is a composite of multiple different types of tests, perhaps one liquid, one physical (MRE?) and one histological.
(5) We need to develop a battery of NITs that are both applied and reported in all cases, instead of running large numbers of NITs and only reporting the ones that support the targeted medication.
This conversation goes on to focus on points #2 and #3, which touch on the relationship between early blood test results and proof of endpoint efficacy.
By SurfingNASH.com3.9
2424 ratings
Send us Fan Mail
This conversation starts with Quentin Anstee sharing the five key takeaways for NITs in general and NIT Best Practices he developed while preparing recent talks for the Liver Forum and the ICFL meeting in Vienna:
(1) As we have discussed on this podcast and elsewhere, trial endpoints around balloon hepatocytes are, in Quentin's words, "not sufficiently robust."
(2) Rapidly attaining response from a given test (ALT, for example) is not necessarily a guarantee of early efficacy.
(3) "Simple indirect biomarker panels like FIB-4" need to be interpreted with caution.
(4) Since we do not have a single perfect gold standard test (neither histological nor non-invasive), we should consider a standard for clinical trial assessment that is a composite of multiple different types of tests, perhaps one liquid, one physical (MRE?) and one histological.
(5) We need to develop a battery of NITs that are both applied and reported in all cases, instead of running large numbers of NITs and only reporting the ones that support the targeted medication.
This conversation goes on to focus on points #2 and #3, which touch on the relationship between early blood test results and proof of endpoint efficacy.

32,087 Listeners

30,693 Listeners

9,629 Listeners

104 Listeners

21,149 Listeners

3,366 Listeners

112,144 Listeners

56,553 Listeners

9,528 Listeners

8,027 Listeners

10,182 Listeners

6,398 Listeners

0 Listeners

427 Listeners

745 Listeners