This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Atacicept does in the body
Proteinuria
From the FDA-approved label: Atacicept-vymj, a BLyS-specific inhibitor and APRIL blocker, is a TACI-Fc fusion glycoprotein that binds B cell activating factor (BAFF) and APRIL with dissociation constants (Kd) of 106 pM and 33 pM, respectively, and reduces BAFF- and APRIL-mediated signaling. BAFF is also known as BlyS. Reduction in BAFF- and APRIL-mediated signaling decreases production of serum galactose deficient IgA1 (Gd-IgA1), which is implicated in the pathophysiology of IgAN.
What happened in people
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
§ A fixed RNAWiki sentence
Where this came from
Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.
No reviewed claim names a result for any goal on this record.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
Not recorded.
Where it acts
Not recorded.
Kind of result
No result is published, so no kind of result applies yet
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. It is a prescription or clinician-administered medicine where it is approved.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as protein.
FDA substance registry · K3D9A0ICQ3 · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
No recorded sentence describes the change this makes in a way that stands on its own. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 84 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Protein
A protein is a folded chain your body builds to do a specific job.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A protein is like a tool bent into one shape for one task.
Where that stops being true. A tool keeps its shape. A protein can change shape and stop working.
What people get wrong. Protein in food and a protein in the body are related but not the same thing.
A polymer of amino acids folded into a defined structure that determines its function.
Enzyme
An enzyme is a protein that speeds up one chemical change.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
An enzyme is like a machine on a production line doing one cut.
Where that stops being true. A machine is switched on and off by a person. Enzymes are controlled by the cell.
What people get wrong. Enzymes are thought to be used up. They are not; they work again and again.
A catalytic protein that lowers the activation energy of a specific reaction.
Receptor
A receptor is a part of a cell that a signal fits into.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A receptor is like a lock waiting for one key.
Where that stops being true. A lock either opens or does not. A receptor can be half-triggered, or worn out.
What people get wrong. Fitting a receptor is read as causing a benefit. It causes a step, and nothing more.
A protein that binds a specific ligand and converts that binding into a cellular response.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Incidence of adverse events observed during the dosing period
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT06674577
How many people
750
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Percentage of Participants Experiencing a New Flare as Defined by British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) Score A or B
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00624338
How many people
461
Study design
Phase 2/Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Change from baseline in urine protein to creatinine ratio (UPCR)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT04716231
How many people
376
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20 Response Based on C-reactive Protein (ACR20-CRP) at Week 26
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00595413
How many people
311
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Percentage of Subjects With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) Responder Index (SRI) Response at Week 24 Using Screening Visit as Baseline
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT01972568
How many people
306
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20 Response Based on C-reactive Protein (ACR20-CRP) at Week 26
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00430495
How many people
256
Study design
Phase 2
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Result not recorded on this page
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. No limitation is recorded for this study.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
□Living longer, or avoiding a major eventNo evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
□Symptoms and quality of lifeNo evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
□A number that stands in for healthNo evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.No registered study measures this.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in Mouse, Non-human primate. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How long anything takes
Nine different lengths of time that get confused with each other. None of them is worked out from another.
Before anything is noticed.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before a test result moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Before performance moves.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
How long the result was watched.No finished study window is recorded for a study that tested this substance.
How long people took it.How long people actually took it is not stored. The study window is not the same thing.
How long people were followed.Follow-up length is not stored separately. It is never read off the study window, which would be a different thing.
How fast the body clears it. 40 days
Read from the label, which states: “The estimated clearance of atacicept-vymj is 3.2 L/day, and the elimination half-life is approximately 40 days in IgAN patients.”
How long effects linger.RNAWiki does not store this separately, and never works it out from another figure on this page.
Beyond the studies. Nothing is recorded about the long term.
The longest finished study sets the edge of what anyone measured.
A study window is not how long people took it, and neither is how long they were followed. Where RNAWiki holds only one of the three, it shows one.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
TRUTAKNA is indicated to reduce proteinuria in adults with primary immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN) at risk for disease progression. This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on reduction of proteinuria. It has not been established whether TRUTAKNA slows kidney function decline over the long-term in patients with IgAN.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What the label states about particular groups
On pediatric, the label states: “The safety and effectiveness of TRUTAKNA in pediatric patients have not been established.”
US prescribing information · 24aa29f6-ccff-45d3-89af-4d26e525cef8 · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Clinical studies of TRUTAKNA did not include sufficient numbers of patients aged 65 and over to determine whether they respond differently from younger adult patients.”
US prescribing information · 24aa29f6-ccff-45d3-89af-4d26e525cef8 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary Available data on TRUTAKNA use in pregnant women exposed during clinical trials are insufficient to evaluate for a drug-associated risk of major birth defects, miscarriage, or other adverse maternal or fetal outcomes.”
US prescribing information · 24aa29f6-ccff-45d3-89af-4d26e525cef8 · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary There are no data regarding the presence of atacicept-vymj in human milk, the effects of the drug on the breastfed infant, or the effects of the drug on milk production/excretion.”
US prescribing information · 24aa29f6-ccff-45d3-89af-4d26e525cef8 · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Still being tested
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Subcutaneous
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Professional supervision is normally required. It is a prescription or clinician-administered medicine where it is approved.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
The identity record classes it as investigational; no register records an approval.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Sold as injection, solution, given by the subcutaneous route.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take∅Nothing found in the sources checked
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Reports sent to a regulator
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Atacicept appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 1 most-reported reaction terms, 3 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
The recorded terms (1)
blood immunoglobulin g decreased — 3 reaction mentions
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Subcutaneous
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
1 product lists this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 1 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 85052-101 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as injection, solution, taken subcutaneous.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 85052-101 · read 2026-08-29
1 published label names it as an active ingredient. 1 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · 24aa29f6-ccff-45d3-89af-4d26e525cef8 · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · 24aa29f6-ccff-45d3-89af-4d26e525cef8 · read 2026-08-29
Trutakna is subcutaneous at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS TRUTAKNA is a clear to slightly opalescent, brownish-yellow solution, free of visible particles, available as follows: Injection: 150 mg/mL in a single-dose pre-filled autoinjector Injection…, recorded as fda label in effect 2026-08-05 in the United States.
US prescribing information · 24aa29f6-ccff-45d3-89af-4d26e525cef8 · read 2026-08-30
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine, investigational agent. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Atacicept studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Atacicept are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
K3D9A0ICQ3
RxNorm concept
2747237
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Written into the record, not signed off.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
The identity record classes it as investigational; no register records an approval.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
What the approval register records
The earliest marketing start date recorded for a listed product is 20260707.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 85052-101 · read 2026-08-29
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What to learn next
Ordered by what would most change how you read this page, starting with what is easiest to misunderstand.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
7 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
The path through the body — found nothing in the sources checked.
Felt, measured, or meaningful — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
Claims that go past the evidence — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
Recorded evidence blocks (9)
Q1
What did Atacicept's largest trial (750 people) and its longest (6.5 years) measure?
750 people in Atacicept's largest registered study, 6.5 years in its longest registered window, measuring Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20 Response Based on C-reactive Protein (ACR20-CRP) at Week 26. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
15 phase2, 4 phase3, 1 phase1; NCT06674577; 2031-05-21; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2016, NCT01972568.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Atacicept was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
Show the evidence
phase2
15
phase3
4
phase1
1
Last recorded human testNCT01972568
2016-09
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From mouse to human: where has Atacicept shown mechanism-only?
Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20 Response Based on C-reactive Protein (ACR20-CRP) at Week 26 — the recorded outcome words.
Show the evidence
NHP
mechanism-only
mouse
mechanism-only
humanNCT00430495
mechanism-only; Percentage of Participants Achieving American College of Rheumatology 20 Response Based on C-reactive Protein (ACR20-CRP) at Week 26; 18
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
8 of Atacicept's trials stopped: safety, accrual/recruitment, funding/business, other?
safety (2), accrual/recruitment (1), funding/business (1) and other (4): Atacicept's stop wording, clustered. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
"The study was terminated due to unanticipated safety issues"; 8 of 18 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00573157
terminated; "The study was terminated due to unanticipated safety issues"
NCT00624468
terminated; "EMD Serono voluntarily decided to terminate this trial after observing increased MS disease activity in trial 28063 ATAMS \[Please refer to ATAMS\]"
NCT00642902
terminated; "Sponsor voluntarily decided to terminate trial due to increased MS disease activity in atacicept arms as compared to placebo during a routine IDMC review."
NCT00853762
terminated; "EMD Serono voluntarily decided to terminate this trial after observing increased MS disease activity in trial 28063 ATAMS \[Please refer to ATAMS\]"
NCT01369628
terminated; "Please see Purpose Statement below"
NCT02070978
terminated; "The study was terminated early due to shortage of drug supply."
2 further recorded trials
NCT02808429
terminated; "Study was terminated early as per sponsor decision due to unexpectedly slow enrollment."
NCT05609812
withdrawn; "Study recruitment is paused due to business reasons, but not due to regulatory or safety concerns."
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Human studies of Atacicept used Atacicept 75 mg — over how long?
Change from baseline in urine protein to creatinine ratio (UPCR); Incidence of adverse events observed during the dosing period; latest 2031-05-21
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT04716231
"Atacicept in Subjects With IgA Nephropathy"; n 376; "Change from baseline in urine protein to creatinine ratio (UPCR)"; 2028-07
NCT06674577
"A Rollover Study to Evaluate the Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Atacicept"; n 750; "Incidence of adverse events observed during the dosing period"; 2031-05-21
NCT06983028
"Atacicept in Multiple Glomerular Diseases"; n 250; "AE profile and results of routine clinical and laboratory tests"; 2027-11
NCT07020923
"Monthly Dosing of Atacicept in IgAN"; n 90; "Evaluate the effect of atacicept on Gd-IgA1 in patients with IgAN"; 2027-09
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
At the median, Atacicept's trials enrolled 170 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
170
Largest enrolment
750
Registered trials counted
18
Q9
What do 3 spontaneous reports say about Atacicept — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Atacicept appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 1 most-reported reaction term, 3 reaction mentions were counted: blood immunoglobulin g decreased 3. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL1742986 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
blood immunoglobulin g decreased
3
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 7 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.