Skip to content

Obeticholic acid

  • Prescription medicine
  • Withdrawn
  • Identity checked
  • Sources last checked 2026-09-04

This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.

What Obeticholic acid does in the body

RNAWiki has not recorded what this substance changes in the body.

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. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.

What the registries record it as

  • The substance registry classes this as chemical.

    FDA substance registry · 0462Z4S4OZ · read 2026-08-29

  • Its recorded molecular formula is C26H44O4, weighing 420.6.

    PubChem record · 447715 · read 2026-08-29

Where each sentence above came from

No plain explanation of what this changes is stored.

No recorded use is stored in reader language.

No statement of the main limit is recorded.

The four opening statements run to 26 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 peopleRead 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.

Time to the First Adjudicated Event for Clinical Outcome Composite Endpoint: Percentage of Participants With an Event

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT02548351
How many people
2477
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.

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

DB Phase: Number of Participants Who Were Responders and Showed Improvement in Fibrosis by at Least 1 Stage Without Worsening of Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis (NASH)

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT03439254
How many people
919
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.

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Time to the First Occurrence of Composite Endpoint

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT02308111
How many people
334
Study design
Phase 4
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.

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Hepatic Histological Improvement in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) Activity Score (NAS)

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT01265498
How many people
283
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.

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

DB Phase: Composite Endpoint Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP) And Total Bilirubin, 10 mg OCA Versus Placebo

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT01473524
How many people
217
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.

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • Europe PMC · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot

Double-blind Phase: Percent Change From Baseline in Serum Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP)

The study did not show it

Who was studied
NCT00550862
How many people
165
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.

Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary

Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.

  • openFDA Drugs@FDA · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • PubChem PUG-REST · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
  • Europe PMC · 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 peopleRead 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.

  1. Living longer, or avoiding a major event No evidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.No registered study measures this.
  2. What a body can do day to day No evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
  3. Measured performance No evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
  4. Symptoms and quality of life No evidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.No registered study measures this.
  5. A number that stands in for health Evidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.3 registered measures of this kind.
  6. A step measured inside a person Evidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
  7. Animals Evidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in C. elegans (roundworm), Mouse. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
  8. Cells in a dish Evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.Stored mechanism abstracts describe steps measured in cells or tissue.
  9. A guess from software No 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 takeRead 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.

  • maximum concentration
  • time to maximum concentration
  • serum albumin

Meaningful

Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.

No registered study measured anything of this 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 (6)
  • fasting blood sugar
  • prothrombin time
  • systematic registry
  • alkaline phosphatase
  • grade of nafld on ultrasound
  • reduction of alt levels

These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.

What is missing or unclearRead 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

No description of who was studied is recorded.

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.

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 takeRead 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 takeRead 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

Withdrawn

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

Not recorded.

Nothing recorded

Where this came from

RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.

No form or route is recorded.

No source is stored against this line.

Who oversees it

Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.

Quoted from a source

Where this came from

Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.

Suppression classes recorded: S8.

No source is stored against this line.

What is in the pack

Not recorded.

Nothing recorded

Where this came from

RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.

Nothing is recorded about product quality.

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 takeNothing 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.

Obeticholic acid appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 2229 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.

The recorded terms (10)
  • pruritus — 1106 reaction mentions
  • fatigue — 359 reaction mentions
  • constipation — 137 reaction mentions
  • arthralgia — 135 reaction mentions
  • hospitalisation — 126 reaction mentions
  • blood alkaline phosphatase increased — 91 reaction mentions
  • therapy interrupted — 82 reaction mentions
  • abdominal pain upper — 79 reaction mentions
  • pruritus generalised — 59 reaction mentions
  • abdominal distension — 55 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 unclearRead 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

Not recorded.

Nothing recorded

Where this came from

RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.

The exact form studied is not recorded.

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

  • 11 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 11 of them contain it and nothing else.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 47848-056 · read 2026-08-29

  • They are sold as powder and tablet, film coated.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 47848-056 · read 2026-08-29

  • 22310 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as botanical with nutrients, non-nutrient/non-botanical and other combinations.

    NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · 213895 · read 2026-08-29

  • Those labels carry all other, nutrient and structure/function claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.

    NIH Dietary Supplement Label Database · 213895 · read 2026-08-29

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 takeRead 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, withdrawn medicine. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.

Questions worth asking

  • Which of the trials of Obeticholic acid 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 unclearRead from sources, not yet reviewed

What nobody knows yet

Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.

How fast does the body clear it?

The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.

Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.

What would answer it

A stored source that records 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 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 Obeticholic acid 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 peopleRead 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)
0462Z4S4OZ
CAS registry number
459789-99-2
PubChem compound
447715
ChEMBL
CHEMBL566315
ChEBI
43602
WHO international nonproprietary name list entry
9084
RxNorm concept
1798288
EMA substance identifier
100000141528
DrugBank
DB05990

Checks this page had to pass

  • Passed

    Identity resolved

    no open identity hold

  • Passed

    No unresolved merge across substance families

    no quarantine open

  • Not passed

    Every public sentence names a source

    The opening statement carries no source: the record holds neither an explanation nor a recorded use.

  • 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

    Suppression classes recorded: S8.

  • Passed

    Canonical metadata present

    slug and display name present

What is missing or unclearRead 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

  • 5 approved applications cover products containing this substance. The earliest was NDA207999, approved 20160527 to INTERCEPT.

    Drugs@FDA application register · NDA207999 · read 2026-08-29

  • Marketing status on the register: discontinued and none (tentative approval).

    Drugs@FDA application register · NDA207999 · read 2026-08-29

  • The earliest marketing start date recorded for a listed product is 20160527.

    FDA National Drug Code directory · 47848-056 · read 2026-08-29

What is missing or unclearRead 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.
  • How long anything takes — 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 (10)

What did Obeticholic acid's largest trial (2477 people) and its longest (9.7 years) measure?


2477 people in Obeticholic acid's largest registered study, 9.7 years in its longest registered window, measuring OLE Phase: Number of Participants Reporting All-cause Mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

18 phase2, 6 phase3, 5 phase1, 3 na, 2 na or unstated, 2 phase4, 1 early phase1; NCT00570765; 2017-09-25; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2025, NCT05239468.

Interpretation These counts include studies where Obeticholic acid 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
    18
  • phase3
    6
  • phase1
    5
  • na
    3
  • na or unstated
    2
  • phase4
    2
2 more recorded rows
  • early phase1
    1
  • Last recorded human test NCT05239468
    2025-09-01

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

From C. elegans to human: where has Obeticholic acid shown lifespan?


C. elegans: lifespan, mouse: lifespan and human: lifespan (37): the rungs where Obeticholic acid has a recorded finding. Europe PMC and ClinicalTrials.gov · organism ladder · 2026-09-01

Interpretation OLE Phase: Number of Participants Reporting All-cause Mortality — the recorded outcome words.

Yeast C. elegans lifespanDrosophila Mouse lifespanRat Dog Non-human primate Human lifespan
Show the evidence
  • C. elegans
    lifespan
  • mouse
    lifespan
  • human NCT03439254
    lifespan; OLE Phase: Number of Participants Reporting All-cause Mortality; 37

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

9 of Obeticholic acid's trials stopped: safety, accrual/recruitment, funding/business, sponsor decision unspecified, other?


safety (1), accrual/recruitment (3), funding/business (1), sponsor decision unspecified (1) and other (3): Obeticholic acid's stop wording, clustered. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

"Study stopped by sponsor due to administrative reasons"; 9 of 37 registered studies

Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT00550862
    terminated; "Study stopped by sponsor due to administrative reasons"
  • NCT02039219
    terminated; "Post-marketing reports of hepatotoxicity associated with obeticholic acid emerged in June 2017, investigators temporarily halted patient recruitment June 2017."
  • NCT02308111
    terminated; "The DMC made the recommendation to not pursue further enrollment given the lack of feasibility for this post-marketing study as designed."
  • NCT02548351
    terminated; "The FDA issued a CRL in response to Intercept's NDA for OCA for the treatment of NASH. Sponsor decided to terminate 747-303 before the planned completion date."
  • NCT03633227
    terminated; "Due to Ocaliva (obeticholic acid) US labeling update, the sponsor decided to terminate the study."
  • NCT04594694
    terminated; "Intercept made a business decision to terminate the study based on FDA's request for voluntary withdrawal of Ocaliva and the issuance of clinical hold on studies under US IND involving OCA."
3 further recorded trials
  • NCT05223036
    terminated; "Protocol has been completed prematurely due to poor accrual and study feasibility."
  • NCT05293938
    withdrawn; "A fundamental protocol deviation on data capture left the database no longer fit for purpose."
  • NCT05321524
    terminated; "After extensive efforts to improve recruitment, it is deemed not feasible to enroll the requisite number of subjects to generate data needed to meet the study objectives. EMA Paediatric Committee agreed with the Sponsor to terminate this…"

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

Human studies of Obeticholic acid used obeticholic acid 10 mg — over how long?


studies of Obeticholic acid used the recorded amount. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

7 recorded entries; human; also "obeticholic acid 10 mg", "10 mg Obeticholic Acid (OCA)", "Obeticholic acid (10 mg)"

Show the evidence

human

  • NCT01904539
    obeticholic acid 10 mg
  • NCT02039219
    10 mg Obeticholic Acid (OCA)
  • NCT03439254
    Obeticholic acid (10 mg)
  • NCT03439254
    Obeticholic acid (10 mg to 25 mg)
  • NCT05239468
    Obeticholic Acid 5 mg
  • NCT05293938
    Obeticholic Acid 5 MG
1 more recorded row
  • human NCT05293938
    Obeticholic Acid 10 MG

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

Which of alkaline phosphatase, fasting blood sugar and grade of nafld on ultrasound did Obeticholic acid's trials measure?


alkaline phosphatase, fasting blood sugar and grade of nafld on ultrasound lead 9 outcome terms across Obeticholic acid's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

Interpretation serum albumin, prothrombin time, systematic registry, alkaline phosphatase, grade of nafld on ultrasound and reduction of alt levels follow.

Show the evidence
  • maximum concentration
    1
  • time to maximum concentration
    1
  • fasting blood sugar
    1
  • serum albumin
    1
  • prothrombin time
    1
  • systematic registry
    1
3 more recorded rows
  • alkaline phosphatase
    1
  • grade of nafld on ultrasound
    1
  • reduction of alt levels
    1

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

Which of Obeticholic acid's 3 ongoing trials reports first?


3 registered trials of Obeticholic acid are open; earliest completion 2026-03-01. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01

Mean change in leucine-rich repeat-containing G-protein coupled receptor 5+ cell count; Change from baseline fibrosis stage at 6 months; fibrosis improvement (≥ 1 stage), with no worsening of steatosis, detected by fibroscan device; latest 2027-09-01

Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT04939051
    "Obeticholic Acid for Prevention in Barrett's Esophagus"; n 30; "Mean change in leucine-rich repeat-containing G-protein coupled receptor 5+ cell count"; 2027-09-01
  • NCT05573204
    "Comparative Study Between Obeticholic Acid Versus Vitamin E in Patients with Non-alcoholic Steatohepatitis"; n 59; "Change from baseline fibrosis stage at 6 months; fibrosis improvement (≥ 1 stage), with no worsening of steatosis, detected by fibroscan device"; 2026-12-30
  • NCT06691412
    "Obeticholic Acid Among Chronic HBV Patients with Hepatic Steatosis : Clinical and Portal Doppler Outcomes"; n 100; "Degree of hepatic steatosis before and after six months of obeticholic acid use"; 2026-03-01

recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04

Which 8 trials of Obeticholic acid posted no result?


Posted no result
8 of 8 completed trials
Registrations
NCT01904539, NCT01933503, NCT01625026, NCT03253276, NCT03836937 and NCT05133830, and 2 more
Completion dates
oldest 2013-10; newest 2024-05-23
Show the evidence

Trial

  • NCT01904539
    2013-10
  • NCT01933503
    2013-11
  • NCT01625026
    2016-04
  • NCT03253276
    2018-09-20
  • NCT03836937
    2021-12-31
  • NCT05133830
    2022-05-31
2 further recorded trials
  • NCT06715319
    2024-04-29
  • NCT07104786
    2024-05-23

At the median, Obeticholic acid's trials enrolled 59 people — anything larger?


Median enrolment
59
Largest enrolment
2477
Registered trials counted
37

What do 2229 spontaneous reports say about Obeticholic acid — 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.

Obeticholic acid appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 2229 reaction mentions were counted: pruritus 1106; fatigue 359; constipation 137; arthralgia 135. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL566315 · 2026-06-24

Show the evidence
  • pruritus
    1106
  • fatigue
    359
  • constipation
    137
  • arthralgia
    135
  • hospitalisation
    126
  • blood alkaline phosphatase increased
    91
4 more recorded rows
  • therapy interrupted
    82
  • abdominal pain upper
    79
  • pruritus generalised
    59
  • abdominal distension
    55

recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04

What is recorded about Obeticholic acid and AMPK?


"We also investigated whether miR-802 and AMPK have roles in modulating beneficial therapeutic effects mediated by obeticholic acid (OCA), a promising clinical agent for NASH." — where Obeticholic acid and AMPK appear together. Europe PMC · pathway abstract search · 2022-09-17

AMPK, autophagy; PMID 36126896, 33767132, 35439472

Show the evidence
  • AMPK PMID 36126896
    "We also investigated whether miR-802 and AMPK have roles in modulating beneficial therapeutic effects mediated by obeticholic acid (OCA), a promising clinical agent for NASH."

autophagy

  • PMID 33767132
    "FXR regulated genes that participate in renal autophagy under feeding and fasting conditions, such as hepatic autophagy, and the activation of FXR by agonists, such as GW4064 and INT-747, attenuated the increased autophagy and apoptosis of hypoxia-induced human renal proximal tubule epithelial (HK2) cells."
  • PMID 35439472
    "Accordingly, the present study aimed at investigating the impact of the FXR agonist, obeticholic acid (OCA), on modulating the aberrant ileal autophagy and barrier dysfunction in NASH, exploring the possible implication of the TLR4/TGF-β1 axis."

recorded 2022-09-17 · last checked 2026-09-04

Where it is registered
Identifiers, relations and other names

The exact record

ChEMBL id
CHEMBL566315
PubChem CID
447715
CAS number
459789-99-2
RxCUI
1798288
InChIKey
ZXERDUOLZKYMJM-ZWECCWDJSA-N
Also called
6-ecdca, 6-ethylchenodeoxycholic acid, Acide obeticholique, Acido obeticolico, oca, (3.ALPHA.,5.BETA.,6.ALPHA.,7.ALPHA.)-6-ETHYL-3,7-DIHYDROXYCHOLAN-24-OIC ACID, 6-ALPHA-ETHYLCHENODEOXYCHOLIC ACID, CHOLAN-24-OIC ACID, 6-ETHYL-3,7-DIHYDROXY-, (3.ALPHA.,5.BETA.,6.ALPHA.,7.ALPHA.)-, OBETICHOLIC ACID [JAN], OBETICHOLIC ACID [MI], OBETICHOLIC ACID [ORANGE BOOK], OBETICHOLIC ACID [USAN]
Development code
DSP-1747, INT-747
Trade name
Ocaliva, Zektayos - Hepjuvo
Sources (8)

Sources

2 more sources

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

How these records are assembled · Which registers were checked

Index-quality checks
  • identity passed: no open identity hold
  • required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: 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: 8 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.