This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Evolocumab does in the body
Used when cholesterol remains very high despite standard cholesterol medicines.
Your liver pulls bad cholesterol out of the blood using receptors that it reuses over and over. A protein called PCSK9 marks those receptors for destruction after a single use. Evolocumab catches PCSK9 in the bloodstream before it can do that, so each receptor gets recycled many more times and the liver clears far more cholesterol.
What happened in people
Added to standard treatment, evolocumab lowered LDL, often called “bad” cholesterol, by 59% and modestly reduced heart-related problems.
✓ Reviewed first-read answer
Where this came from
A person wrote this and a reviewer approved it against this exact record. It carries no effect size.
A reviewer approved this against this record. The reviewed-claim record carrying the exact population and effect size does not exist yet.
No source is stored against this line.
The limit that matters most
The study did not show that evolocumab helped people live longer.
Where it acts
Blood plasma and the hepatocyte surface
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
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 · LKC0U3A8NJ · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
The recorded explanation is written in label language rather than for a beginner. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
The limit a reviewer approved as the one that matters most here.
The four opening statements run to 86 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.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
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 was measured, goal by goal
One row for each goal a registered study measured something for. One column for each kind of thing that could be measured.
Registered studies list 40 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.
There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.
Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
Goal
Life outcome
What a body can do
How a person feels
A test result
A step in the body
Harms
How long
Who was studied
Cholesterol
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
△Only a number moved16 registered test measure.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Healthy ageing
…Waiting for a reviewer1 registered study measure of this kind. No reviewed result yet.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Cholesterol
low density lipoprotein cholesterol at week 12; ldl c at week 52; ldl c at the mean of weeks 10 and 12; ldl c at week 12; ldl c at the mean of weeks 22 and 24; ldl c at week 24; low density lipoprotein cholesterol at month 2; decrease in ldl cholesterol
Healthy ageing
all cause mortality
Sorted by fixed word lists, version v1. A name the rules do not recognise stays unsorted rather than moving to the nearest column.
What each mark on this table means
∅ Nothing in the sources checked
No registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
△ Only a number moved
16 registered test measure.
— Not recorded
Harms were not a registered measure for this goal.
… Waiting for a reviewer
Who was studied is listed further down the page.
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.
Composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalisation for unstable angina or coronary revascularisation
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
FOURIER (NCT01764633)
How many people
27564
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
p < 0.001 for the primary composite; no significant reduction in cardiovascular or all-cause death
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Median follow-up was only 2.2 years, which is short relative to the lifetime exposure implied by the genetic rationale for the target.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Subcutaneous autoinjector or single-use on-body infusor
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
ClinicalTrials.gov, FOURIER (NCT01764633) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Drugs@FDA, REPATHA BLA 125522, original approval 27 August 2015 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.cfm?event=overview.process&ApplNo=125522) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Change in LDL cholesterol over 12 months with a humanised PCSK9 antibody
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
SPIRE bococizumab programme (Ridker 2017, six parallel trials)
How many people
4300
Study design
Phase 3
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
LDL reduction of 54.2% at 12 weeks was significantly attenuated by anti-drug antibodies; programme discontinued
Repeated elsewhere
Failed to Replicate
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 autoinjector or single-use on-body infusor
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
ClinicalTrials.gov, FOURIER (NCT01764633) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Drugs@FDA, REPATHA BLA 125522, original approval 27 August 2015 (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.cfm?event=overview.process&ApplNo=125522) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 2 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 eventEvidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.2 registered measures of this kind. No reviewed result.
□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 healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.17 registered measures of this kind.
■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. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
■Cells in a dishEvidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
□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 changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Start
Evolocumab
What a person takes: Subcutaneous autoinjector or single-use on-body infusor.
The measurement behind this step
140 mg in 1 mL every two weeks by prefilled autoinjector, or 420 mg in 3.5 mL once monthly delivered over about nine minutes by an on-body infusor.
Getting in
Subcutaneous injection every two weeks or monthly
A pen delivers 140 mg under the skin every fortnight, or an on-body infusor delivers 420 mg once a month.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
140 mg every 2 weeks or 420 mg monthly, with non-linear target-mediated disposition; the effective half-life is 11-17 days and clearance is dominated by binding to circulating PCSK9.
ClinicalTrials.gov, FOURIER (NCT01764633) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Reaching the cell
Circulating in plasma where PCSK9 is
It does not need to enter any cell. Its target is a protein floating in the bloodstream on its way to the liver surface.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
PCSK9 is secreted by hepatocytes into plasma and acts on LDL receptors extracellularly, so an antibody confined to the vascular and interstitial space reaches its target completely.
ClinicalTrials.gov, FOURIER (NCT01764633) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What it acts on
Binding the catalytic domain of PCSK9
The antibody grips the exact face of PCSK9 that would otherwise clamp onto the cholesterol receptor.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Binds the catalytic domain of PCSK9 at the surface that contacts the EGF-A domain of the LDL receptor, sterically preventing the PCSK9-LDLR interaction. The IgG2 isotype was chosen for minimal effector function.
ClinicalTrials.gov, FOURIER (NCT01764633) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
The change it makes
LDL receptors are recycled instead of destroyed
Without PCSK9 attached, the receptor releases its cargo inside the cell and returns to the surface to collect more, over and over.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Unbound LDL receptors dissociate from LDL in the acidified endosome and recycle to the plasma membrane rather than being routed to the lysosome. Hepatocyte surface LDL receptor density rises and fractional catabolic rate of LDL apolipoprotein B increases.
ClinicalTrials.gov, FOURIER (NCT01764633) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What that does for a person
LDL falls by about 60% within two weeks
Blood cholesterol drops fast and stays down for as long as the injections continue. In the outcome trial, heart attacks and strokes became measurably less frequent.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Median LDL fell from 92 mg/dL to 30 mg/dL by week 48 in FOURIER. Lipoprotein(a) also falls by roughly 25%, an effect not shared by statins and whose contribution to outcome remains under investigation.
ClinicalTrials.gov, FOURIER (NCT01764633) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 5 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
No registered study measured anything of this kind.
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
low density lipoprotein cholesterol at week 12
ldl c at week 52
ldl c at the mean of weeks 10 and 12
ldl c at week 12
ldl c at the mean of weeks 22 and 24
ldl c at week 24
low density lipoprotein cholesterol at month 2
decrease in ldl cholesterol
ldl cholesterol
reduction in low density lipoprotein cholesterol at week 24
and 7 more.
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
all cause mortality
stroke of any kind
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (21)
adverse events
treatment emergent adverse events
who experienced an adverse event
rate of major structural defects
noncalcified coronary artery plaque volume
subclinical atherosclerosis
minimal fibrous cap thickness
coronary flow reserve
monocyte platelet aggregation from baseline
light transmission aggregation from baseline
plaque burden
degree of stenosis caused by the plaque
plaque enhancement
remodeling index of the plaque
presence of t1 hyperintensity in the plaque
plaque distribution whether it is a concentric plaque or not
hemodynamic characteristics hypoperfusion volume
major cardiovascular adverse events
myocardial infarct size
safety and adverse events
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
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. 11 to 17 days
Read from the label, which states: “REPATHA was estimated to have an effective half-life of 11 to 17 days.”
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.
Adults with established cardiovascular disease or familial hypercholesterolaemia whose LDL remains above target on the maximum tolerated statin dose, often with ezetimibe.
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 REPATHA have not been established in pediatric patients with HeFH or HoFH who are younger than 10 years old or in pediatric patients with other types of hypercholesterolemia.”
US prescribing information · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “In controlled trials, 7656 (41%) patients treated with REPATHA were ≥ 65 years old and 1500 (8%) were ≥ 75 years old.”
US prescribing information · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary Available data from clinical trials and postmarketing reports on REPATHA use in pregnant women are insufficient to evaluate for a drug-associated risk of major birth defects, miscarriage or other adverse maternal or fetal outcomes.”
US prescribing information · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary There is no information regarding the presence of evolocumab in human milk, the effects on the breastfed infant, or the effects on milk production.”
US prescribing information · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced liver function, the label states: “No dose adjustment is needed in patients with mild to moderate hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh A or B).”
US prescribing information · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · read 2026-08-30
On people with reduced kidney function, the label states: “No dose adjustment is needed in patients with renal impairment [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3) ] .”
US prescribing information · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
Bococizumab, a humanised rather than fully human PCSK9 antibody, was defeated by anti-drug antibodies and discontinued in 2016
The 2015 launch price of roughly $14,000 per year produced payer rejection rates high enough to force a 60% list price cut in 2018
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
Given by a clinician
❝ 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 autoinjector or single-use on-body infusor
✎ 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 Monoclonal Antibody (mAb).
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
5 mL once monthly delivered over about nine minutes by an on-body infusor.
✎ 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◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
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.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
No boxed warning. Injection site reactions, nasopharyngitis and influenza-like symptoms are the commonest events. Rates of neurocognitive events, new-onset diabetes and myalgia did not differ meaningfully from placebo in FOURIER.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
ClinicalTrials.gov, FOURIER (NCT01764633) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
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.
Evolocumab appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 29358 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
The recorded terms (10)
wrong technique in product usage process — 7200 reaction mentions
injection site pain — 4676 reaction mentions
myalgia — 2971 reaction mentions
back pain — 2952 reaction mentions
injection site bruising — 2370 reaction mentions
rhinorrhoea — 2177 reaction mentions
pain in extremity — 1912 reaction mentions
influenza like illness — 1900 reaction mentions
muscle spasms — 1612 reaction mentions
injection site haemorrhage — 1588 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 autoinjector or single-use on-body infusor
✎ 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
mL once monthly delivered over about nine minutes by an on-body infusor.
✎ 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 which forms are sold and how they compare.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
7 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 7 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 72511-750 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as injection, solution, taken subcutaneous.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 72511-750 · read 2026-08-29
The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is antibodies, monoclonal [cs] and pcsk9 inhibitor [epc].
FDA National Drug Code directory · 72511-750 · 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 · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · read 2026-08-29
REPATHA is subcutaneous at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS REPATHA injection is a clear to opalescent, colorless to pale yellow solution available as follows: 140 mg/mL solution in a prefilled single-dose pen 140 mg/mL solution in a prefilled single…, recorded as fda label in effect 2026-08-19 in the United States.
US prescribing information · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · 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. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Evolocumab 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
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That a 59% LDL reduction implies a proportional reduction in events over a two-year horizon
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That the absence of a mortality signal at 2.2 years means there will never be one; the trial was neither long enough nor powered for it
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That achieving very low LDL is equivalent to the lifelong low LDL of PCSK9 loss-of-function carriers
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
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 Evolocumab 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.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
FOURIER: LDL fell 59%, and the composite endpoint fell 15% relative over 2.2 years
In plain words
In 27,564 people with existing heart disease already taking statins, evolocumab cut LDL cholesterol to a median of 30 mg/dL and reduced a combined measure of heart attacks, strokes, unstable angina, revascularisation and cardiovascular death by 15% relative.
What was measured
59% LDL reduction at 48 weeks; 15% relative reduction in the primary composite endpoint
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with median follow-up 2.2 years. At 48 weeks LDL fell 59% from a median baseline of 92 mg/dL to 30 mg/dL. The primary composite endpoint was reduced, driven by myocardial infarction, stroke and revascularisation. There was no significant reduction in cardiovascular death or all-cause death, which the trial was neither long enough nor powered to detect.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
A 59% LDL reduction is read as a 59% reduction in risk
In plain words
The cholesterol number halves, but the event rate does not. Over 2.2 years the absolute difference in the primary endpoint was small, and no survival difference was demonstrated at all.
What was measured
That the magnitude of LDL lowering translates proportionally into event or mortality reduction over a short trial
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The relative reduction in the composite endpoint was 15%, against a 59% reduction in LDL. Absolute risk reduction over the trial period was in the low single percentage points, giving a number needed to treat in the several dozens over 2.2 years. Cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality were not significantly reduced. The mechanistic argument that longer exposure would yield larger benefit is plausible on genetic grounds but was not what this trial measured.
Source
Sabatine et al., NEJM 2017, primary and secondary endpoint results
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
caution
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Bococizumab: the class member that failed because it was humanised rather than fully human
In plain words
Pfizer developed a PCSK9 antibody in parallel. Patients made antibodies against the drug itself, and the cholesterol lowering faded away in a large fraction of them. The whole programme was cancelled.
What was measured
LDL reduction of 54.2% at 12 weeks, substantially attenuated by anti-drug antibodies over time
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
Six parallel SPIRE lipid-lowering trials enrolled 4,300 patients. At 12 weeks bococizumab reduced LDL by 54.2%. Anti-drug antibodies developed in a large proportion of patients and significantly attenuated the LDL reduction, with wide variation even among patients who did not develop them. Bococizumab was humanised rather than fully human, and Pfizer discontinued the programme in 2016. This is a direct demonstration that immunogenicity, not target biology, can decide whether a class member survives.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The fear that very low LDL harms cognition was tested and not supported
In plain words
Driving LDL to 30 mg/dL, well below anything seen in ordinary practice, raised a genuine concern about brain function because the brain needs cholesterol. A dedicated cognitive substudy of FOURIER found no difference from placebo.
What was measured
Not recorded
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The EBBINGHAUS substudy embedded within FOURIER used a validated computerised cognitive battery and found no significant difference between evolocumab and placebo, including in patients achieving LDL below 25 mg/dL. The brain synthesises its own cholesterol behind the blood-brain barrier and does not depend on plasma LDL, which is the mechanistic explanation. The concern was legitimate, it was tested prospectively, and it was not supported.
Source
EBBINGHAUS cognitive function substudy of FOURIER
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Price fell 60% in 2018 because of uptake, not because of new evidence
In plain words
The launch price of roughly $14,000 a year met widespread payer rejection and low prescription rates. Amgen cut the list price to about $5,850 in 2018. Nothing about the clinical evidence changed.
What was measured
Not recorded
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
Evolocumab launched in 2015 at a US list price near $14,000 per year, drew a cost-effectiveness assessment concluding the price was well above value-based benchmarks, and faced high payer rejection rates. The list price was reduced by roughly 60% in 2018. The episode is a measurable example of price responding to market access pressure rather than to trial results.
Source
Publicly announced US list price reduction for Repatha in 2018
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
verified
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
LKC0U3A8NJ
RxNorm concept
1665895
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: Reviewed first-read answer.
✗ 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 Monoclonal Antibody (mAb).
✓ 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
1 approved application covers products containing this substance. The earliest was BLA125522, approved 20150827 to AMGEN INC.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
3 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 it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — 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.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
A fully human antibody that sequesters PCSK9 and cut LDL cholesterol by 59% on top of statin therapy in 27,564 patients, reducing the composite cardiovascular endpoint by 15% relative over 2.2 years with no reduction in cardiovascular or all-cause mortality.
Recorded evidence blocks (14)
Q1
What did Evolocumab's largest trial (204691 people) and its longest (9.2 years) measure?
204691 people in Evolocumab's largest registered study, 9.2 years in its longest registered window, measuring all-cause mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
40 phase3, 36 phase4, 24 phase2, 11 na or unstated, 7 phase1, 3 early phase1, 3 na; NCT05984953; 2022-10-28; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2026, NCT07422285.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Evolocumab 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
phase3
40
phase4
36
phase2
24
na or unstated
11
phase1
7
early phase1
3
2 more recorded rows
na
3
Last recorded human testNCT07422285
2026-07-24
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q2
From mouse to human: where has Evolocumab shown lifespan?
withdrawn; "The sponsor required early termination of the economic agreement due to a supposed extension of the enrollment period for bureaucracy reasons and for the concomitant Covid -19 Pandemic"
NCT04510844
withdrawn; "loss of funding"
NCT04573777
terminated; "Funding Discontinued"
NCT05144529
terminated; "Slow enrollment."
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
Human studies of Evolocumab used Evolocumab 140 MG/ML [Repatha] — over how long?
6 recorded entries; human; also "Evolocumab 140 mg/mL Subcutaneous Injection 1 milliliter (mL) pre-filled injector Pen x 3 for a monthly dose of 420 mg…", "Evolocumab 140mg/mL Injector 1milliliter (mL) Pen x 3 for a monthly dose of 420 mg for 12 months.", "Evolocumab 140 MG/ML"
Show the evidence
human
NCT04141579
Evolocumab 140 MG/ML [Repatha]
NCT04306081
Evolocumab 140 mg/mL Subcutaneous Injection 1 milliliter (mL) pre-filled injector Pen x 3 for a monthly dose of 420 mg for 6 months.
NCT04306471
Evolocumab 140mg/mL Injector 1milliliter (mL) Pen x 3 for a monthly dose of 420 mg for 12 months.
Evolocumab's half-life is 11 to 17 days — which schedules were studied?
11 to 17 days, the half-life Evolocumab's label states. openfda-label · cd61e902-166d-4aa6-9f3c-a18c1008d07e · 2026-08-30
bioavailability 72% %.
Show the evidence
half life
11 to 17 days; REPATHA was estimated to have an effective half-life of 11 to 17 days.
bioavailability
72% %; Absorption Following a single subcutaneous dose of 140 mg or 420 mg evolocumab administered to healthy adults, median peak serum concentrations were attained in 3 to 4 days, and estimated absolute bioavailability was 72%.
recorded 2026-08-30 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Could one person measure Evolocumab's effect on adverse events?
Adverse events: measured in Evolocumab's trials.
Interpretation adverse events is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
adverse events; 2026-09-01
low density lipoprotein cholesterol at week 12; 2026-09-01
ldl c at week 52; 2026-09-01
ldl c at the mean of weeks 10 and 12; 2026-09-01
ldl c at week 12; 2026-09-01
ldl c at the mean of weeks 22 and 24; 2026-09-01
14 more recorded rows
biomarkers
ldl c at week 24; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
treatment emergent adverse events; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
who experienced an adverse event; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
rate of major structural defects; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
low density lipoprotein cholesterol at month 2; 2026-09-01
reduction in low density lipoprotein cholesterol at week 24; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
ldl c; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
subclinical atherosclerosis; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
platelet activity before and after cholesterol reduction; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
ldl cholesterol reduction dichotomic; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
concentration of lp and snp in the lpa gene; 2026-09-01
half life
2026-09-04; halfLife; 11 to 17 days; 2026-08-30
human trials at or under30
22
smallest human trial
0; NCT03851263; PHASE4; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; WITHDRAWN
Q7
Which of adverse events, all cause mortality and concentration of lp and snp in the lpa gene did Evolocumab's trials measure?
adverse events, all cause mortality and concentration of lp and snp in the lpa gene lead 40 outcome terms across Evolocumab's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
ldl c at the mean of weeks 10 and 12, ldl c at week 12, ldl c at the mean of weeks 22 and 24, ldl c at week 24, treatment emergent adverse events and who experienced an adverse event follow.
Show the evidence
adverse events
1
low density lipoprotein cholesterol at week 12
1
ldl c at week 52
1
ldl c at the mean of weeks 10 and 12
1
ldl c at week 12
1
ldl c at the mean of weeks 22 and 24
1
14 more recorded rows
ldl c at week 24
1
treatment emergent adverse events
1
who experienced an adverse event
1
rate of major structural defects
1
low density lipoprotein cholesterol at month 2
1
decrease in ldl cholesterol
1
ldl cholesterol
1
noncalcified coronary artery plaque volume
1
reduction in low density lipoprotein cholesterol at week 24
1
ldl c
1
subclinical atherosclerosis
1
platelet activity before and after cholesterol reduction
1
ldl cholesterol reduction dichotomic
1
concentration of lp and snp in the lpa gene
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
Which of Evolocumab's 15 ongoing trials reports first?
all-cause mortality; LDL-C reduction of ≥ 50% from baseline and a final LDL-C of <1.4 mmol/L (<55 mg/dL) at 12 months follow-up; latest 2030-07
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT04847752
"Study of Predictive Factors Related to Prognosis of Patients With Ischemic Stroke Due to Large-artery Atherosclerosis"; n 1000; "all-cause mortality"; 2028-12-31
NCT04951856
"Evolocumab or Normal Strategies to Reach LDL Objectives in Acute Myocardial Infarction Upbound to PCI"; n 2166; "LDL-C reduction of ≥ 50% from baseline and a final LDL-C of <1.4 mmol/L (<55 mg/dL) at 12 months follow-up"; 2028-05-22
NCT05152888
"The Impact of Pcsk-9 Inhibition on PET CFR in Patients at High CV Risk"; n 50; "Coronary Flow Reserve"; 2027-12-31
NCT05284747
"EVOLVE-MI: EVOLocumab Very Early After Myocardial Infarction"; n 6019; "Total (first and subsequent) composite of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, any arterial revascularization procedure, and all-cause death"; 2027-05-29
NCT05641753
"Cholesterol Lowering and Residual Risk in Diabetes, Type 1"; n 125; "Change in Monocyte Platelet Aggregation (MPA) from Baseline"; 2027-07-31
NCT06081153
"Mechanistic Clinical Trial of PCSK9 Inhibition for AAA"; n 44; "Interleukin (IL)-6 in myeloid derived monocytes/macrophages from in AAA tissue"; 2029-02-28
9 further recorded trials
NCT06081803
"Evolocumab in STEMI"; n 166; "Myocardial infarct size"; 2025-12-31
NCT06284564
"A Phase II Study Bolstering Outcomes by Optimizing Immunotherapy Strategies With Evolocumab and Nivolumab in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (BOOST-RCC)"; n 10; "Safety and adverse events (AEs)"; 2026-10-01
NCT06496243
"Impact of Obicetrapib and Obicetrapib Plus Repatha on Lp(a) Levels"; n 69; "To evaluate the effect of evolocumab in combination with obicetrapib on lipoprotein (a) (Lp[a])."; 2027-02
NCT06700720
"YN001-004 in Patients With Coronary Atherosclerosis in Australia"; n 24; "Changes in coronary plaque characteristics (volume and composition)"; 2026-06
NCT06858332
"Lipoprotein(a) Levels in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Diseases in Russia"; n 2382; "Percentage of patients (%) with Lp(a) ≥125 nmol/L"; 2027-09-30
NCT07084259
"Single Dose PCSK9 Inhibitor to Improve Cardiovascular Outcomes After PCI: A Pilot Study"; n 352; "Patient-oriented Composite Outcome (MACE)"; 2030-07
NCT07174375
"PCSK9 Inhibitors in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Undergoing Endovascular Therapy"; n 478; "Functional outcome: The proportion of mordified Rankin Scale of 0 to 2 points"; 2027-12-15
NCT07545226
"Comparing the Extent to Which Two Evolocumab Drug Products Are Made Available in the Body After a Single Subcutaneous Dose."; n 405; "Area Under the Concentration-time Curve (AUC) from Time 0 Extrapolated to Infinity (AUCinf) of Evolocumab"; 2026-09-03
NCT07612774
"CAPRA-EVO: a Randomized Serial PCCT Trial of Early Evolocumab After ACS"; n 233; "Total atherosclerotic volume and stenosis severity"; 2029-01-31
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which running trial of Evolocumab could settle lifespan?
NCT04847752 measures all-cause mortality, reading out 2028-12-31.
2 open trials; n 1000; "Study of Predictive Factors Related to Prognosis of Patients With Ischemic Stroke Due to Large-artery Atherosclerosis"
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT04847752
"Study of Predictive Factors Related to Prognosis of Patients With Ischemic Stroke Due to Large-artery Atherosclerosis"; n 1000; "all-cause mortality"; 2028-12-31
NCT06081153
"Mechanistic Clinical Trial of PCSK9 Inhibition for AAA"; n 44; "Interleukin (IL)-6 in myeloid derived monocytes/macrophages from in AAA tissue"; 2029-02-28
Q10
Which 12 trials of Evolocumab posted no result?
Posted no result
12 of 12 completed trials
Registrations
NCT03429998, NCT04665830, NCT06231459, NCT04941105, NCT03791593 and NCT05984953, and 6 more
Completion dates
oldest 2018-01-28; newest 2023-12-15
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT03429998
2018-01-28
NCT04665830
2020-05-01
NCT06231459
2020-12-31
NCT04941105
2022-05-17
NCT03791593
2022-07-20
NCT05984953
2022-10-28
6 further recorded trials
NCT04790513
2022-12-31
NCT04034485
2023-01-30
NCT03734211
2023-05-20
NCT04937413
2023-10-12
NCT04141579
2023-11-09
NCT05974345
2023-12-15
Q11
At the median, Evolocumab's trials enrolled 137 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
137
Largest enrolment
204691
Registered trials counted
119
Q12
What do 29358 spontaneous reports say about Evolocumab — 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.
Evolocumab appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 29358 reaction mentions were counted: wrong technique in product usage process 7200; injection site pain 4676; myalgia 2971; back pain 2952. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL2364655 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
wrong technique in product usage process
7200
injection site pain
4676
myalgia
2971
back pain
2952
injection site bruising
2370
rhinorrhoea
2177
4 more recorded rows
pain in extremity
1912
influenza like illness
1900
muscle spasms
1612
injection site haemorrhage
1588
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q13
Was Evolocumab studied with fasting?
fasting is named in Evolocumab's label sentences: "The overall incidence of AEs was similar between evolocumab and placebo-treated patients, and there were no clinically meaningful differences in changes over time in glycaemic variables (fasting serum glucose and HbA1c) between the two groups." openfda-label+europepmc · 2019-04-02
1 recorded statement; fasting
Show the evidence
fasting
The overall incidence of AEs was similar between evolocumab and placebo-treated patients, and there were no clinically meaningful differences in changes over time in glycaemic variables (fasting serum glucose and HbA1c) between the two groups.
recorded 2019-04-02 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q14
What is recorded about Evolocumab and sirtuin?
"Treatment with the PCSK9 inhibitor (iPCSK9) evolocumab ameliorated MP-induced cellular redox state imbalance, mitochondrial metabolism alteration, and SIRT6 downregulated levels (p < 0.01)." — where Evolocumab and sirtuin appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2026-07-09
"Treatment with the PCSK9 inhibitor (iPCSK9) evolocumab ameliorated MP-induced cellular redox state imbalance, mitochondrial metabolism alteration, and SIRT6 downregulated levels (p < 0.01)."
PMID 41430105
"Overall, the results indicate that PCSK9 inhibition via evolocumab exhibits substantial promise in the prevention of MP-induced endothelial dysfunction, suggesting the PCSK9-SIRT6 axis as a new promising pathway to target in preventive strategies for cardiovascular risk caused by plastic pollution."
AMPKPMID 42494867
"PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies, particularly evolocumab and alirocumab, appear promising because they may confer renal benefit through lipid lowering and kidney-intrinsic effects on lipotoxicity, oxidative stress, AMPK signaling, and profibrotic pathways."
sirtuinPMID 36632236
"However, the mechanism underlying such observations is debated. <b>Methods</b>: Human aortic endothelial cells (TeloHAEC) were pre-treated with 100 µg/mL of the PCSK9i evolocumab and then exposed to 20 ng/mL of IL-6, a major driver of cardiovascular diseases (CVD), in both naïve state and after siRNA-mediated suppression of the NAD-dependent deacetylase sirtuin-3 (SIRT3)."
NAD+PMID 36632236
"However, the mechanism underlying such observations is debated. <b>Methods</b>: Human aortic endothelial cells (TeloHAEC) were pre-treated with 100 µg/mL of the PCSK9i evolocumab and then exposed to 20 ng/mL of IL-6, a major driver of cardiovascular diseases (CVD), in both naïve state and after siRNA-mediated suppression of the NAD-dependent deacetylase sirtuin-3 (SIRT3)."
recorded 2026-07-09 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ChEMBL ATC CC BY-SA · 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 · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · 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: 9 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.