This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Rilonacept does in the body
Rilonacept blocks IL-1 signaling by acting as a soluble decoy receptor that binds both IL-1α and IL-1β and prevents its interaction with cell surface receptors.
From the FDA-approved label: Rilonacept is an interleukin-1 alpha (IL-1α) and interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β) cytokine trap. Rilonacept also binds interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1ra). 1 pM, respectively. CAPS refers to rare genetic syndromes generally caused by mutations in the NLRP-3 [nucleotide-binding domain, leucine rich family (NLR), pyrin domain containing 3] gene (also known as Cold-Induced Autoinflammatory Syndrome-1 [ CIAS1 ]).
Why people take it. Cryopyrin-Associated Periodic Syndromes (CAPS), including Familial Cold Autoinflammatory Syndrome (FCAS), and Muckle-Wells Syndrome
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 protein.
FDA substance registry · 8K80YB5GMG · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
A person wrote this explanation into the record, with the studies named in the path below.
The recorded use, written for a reader without medical training. Not signed off.
No statement of the main limit is recorded.
The four opening statements run to 106 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 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.
Percentage of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00856206
How many people
1315
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. Single-use
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
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Number of Gout Flares Per Participant Assessed From Day 1 to Day 113 (Week 16)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00958438
How many people
248
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. Single-use
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
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Number of Gout Flares Per Participant Assessed From Day 1 to Day 112 (Week 16)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00829829
How many people
241
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. Single-use
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
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Change From Baseline in Patient's Assessment of Pain Using a 5-Point Likert Scale (PAP-LS) in Index Joint to Averaged PAP-LS at 24, 48 and 72 Hours
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00855920
How many people
225
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. Single-use
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
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT01459796
How many people
220
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. Single-use
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
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Change From Baseline to Week-6 (Part A) Endpoint in Mean Key Symptom Score (KSS)
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
NCT00288704
How many people
104
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. Single-use
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
openFDA NDC Directory · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
openFDA SPL label · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
FDA label (openFDA SPL) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 6 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
■Living longer, or avoiding a major eventEvidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.1 registered measure 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.2 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 dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
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.
c reactive protein
flow mediated dilation
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
survival at day 29 of the assigned treatment
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 (3)
hscrp
treatment emergent adverse events
frequency of treatment emergent 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. 7 days
Read from the label, which states: “The average trough levels of rilonacept were approximately 23 mcg/mL at steady state, and the circulation half-life in vivo was approximately 7 days following a 320 mg loading dose and weekly subcutaneous doses of 160 mg for up to 36 weeks in patients with RP.”
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.
ARCALYST (rilonacept) is an interleukin-1 blocker indicated for: Treatment of Cryopyrin-Associated Periodic Syndromes (CAPS), including Familial Cold Autoinflammatory Syndrome (FCAS), and Muckle-Wells Syndrome (MWS) in adults and children 12 years and older ( 1.1, 14.1 ) Maintenance of remission of Deficiency of Interleukin-1 Receptor Antagonist (DIRA) in adults and pediatric patients weighing 10 kg or more ( 1.2,…
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: “Cryopyrin-Associated Periodic Syndromes (CAPS) and Recurrent Pericarditis (RP) Safety and effectiveness in pediatric patients with CAPS and RP below the age of 12 years have not been established.”
US prescribing information · ad965f38-dd22-4607-a673-2fb92f3b527a · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “In the placebo-controlled clinical studies, 78 patients randomized to treatment with ARCALYST were ≥ 65 years of age, and 6 were ≥ 75 years of age.”
US prescribing information · ad965f38-dd22-4607-a673-2fb92f3b527a · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary Rare pregnancy outcomes reported postmarketing and from clinical trials, with very limited use of ARCALYST in pregnant women, are insufficient to evaluate for a drug-associated risk of major birth defects, miscarriage or adverse maternal or fetal outcomes.”
US prescribing information · ad965f38-dd22-4607-a673-2fb92f3b527a · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary There is no information on the presence of rilonacept in either human or animal milk, the effects on the breastfed infant, or the effects on milk production.”
US prescribing information · ad965f38-dd22-4607-a673-2fb92f3b527a · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Prescription only
❝ 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
Single-use
✎ 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. 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: S1.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Sold as vial, injection, powder, lyophilized, for solution, given by the single-use, subcutaneous route.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold and what that means for what is in the pack.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take∅Nothing found in the sources checked
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
∅Nothing found in the sources checked
No harm is recorded against this substance in the sources RNAWiki checked. Finding nothing is not the same as showing there is nothing.
The sources listed were searched and held nothing. That is not the same as nothing existing.
Reports sent to a regulator
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Rilonacept appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 337 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
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
Single-use
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
Nothing further is recorded about which forms are sold.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
4 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 4 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 73604-914 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as injection, powder, lyophilized, for solution and liquid, taken subcutaneous.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 73604-914 · 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 · ad965f38-dd22-4607-a673-2fb92f3b527a · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · ad965f38-dd22-4607-a673-2fb92f3b527a · read 2026-08-29
Arcalyst is subcutaneous at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS For injection: 220 mg of rilonacept as a white to off-white lyophilized powder for reconstitution in single-dose vials., recorded as fda label in effect 2025-12-16 in the United States.
US prescribing information · ad965f38-dd22-4607-a673-2fb92f3b527a · 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 Rilonacept studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Rilonacept are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
8K80YB5GMG
RxNorm concept
763453
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Written into the record, not signed off.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
Suppression classes recorded: S1.
✓ 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 BLA125249, approved 20080227 to KINIKSA PHARMACEUTICALS (UK), LTD..
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
6 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.
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 (11)
Q2
What did Rilonacept's largest trial (1315 people) and its longest (6.2 years) measure?
1315 people in Rilonacept's largest registered study, 6.2 years in its longest registered window, measuring Change in blood hemoglobin concentration. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
14 phase2, 7 phase3, 3 phase1, 1 early phase1, 1 na, 1 phase4; NCT00094900; 2010-12; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2022, NCT03737110.
Interpretation These counts include studies where Rilonacept 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
14
phase3
7
phase1
3
early phase1
1
na
1
phase4
1
1 more recorded row
Last recorded human testNCT03737110
2022-06-30
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q3
From mouse to human: where has Rilonacept shown biomarker?
3 recorded entries; human; also "rilonacept 160 mg", "Rilonacept 80 mg", "Rilonacept 160 mg"
Show the evidence
human
NCT00288704
rilonacept 160 mg
NCT00829829
Rilonacept 80 mg
NCT00829829
Rilonacept 160 mg
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Rilonacept's half-life is 7 days — which schedules were studied?
7 days, the half-life Rilonacept's label states. openfda-label · ad965f38-dd22-4607-a673-2fb92f3b527a · 2026-08-30
Show the evidence
half life
7 days; The average trough levels of rilonacept were approximately 23 mcg/mL at steady state, and the circulation half-life in vivo was approximately 7 days following a 320 mg loading dose and weekly subcutaneous doses of 160 mg for up to 36 weeks in patients with RP.
recorded 2026-08-30 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q7
Which of c reactive protein, flow mediated dilation and frequency of treatment emergent adverse events did Rilonacept's trials measure?
c reactive protein, flow mediated dilation and frequency of treatment emergent adverse events lead 6 outcome terms across Rilonacept's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
flow mediated dilation, frequency of treatment emergent adverse events and survival at day 29 of the assigned treatment follow.
Show the evidence
hscrp
1
c reactive protein
1
treatment emergent adverse events
1
flow mediated dilation
1
frequency of treatment emergent adverse events
1
survival at day 29 of the assigned treatment
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q8
What will the one ongoing trial of Rilonacept report, and when?
Change in number of segments with fluorodeoxyglucose F18 (FDG) uptake on cardiac fluorodeoxyglucose F18 - positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) scan
Show the evidence
TrialNCT06660732
"Rilonacept in Subjects With Cardiac Sarcoidosis"; n 60; "Change in number of segments with fluorodeoxyglucose F18 (FDG) uptake on cardiac fluorodeoxyglucose F18 - positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) scan"; 2027-03
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which 4 trials of Rilonacept posted no result?
Posted no result
4 of 4 completed trials
Registrations
NCT01803321, NCT01045772, NCT00962026 and NCT02171416
Completion dates
oldest 2008-06; newest 2018-05
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT01803321
2008-06
NCT01045772
2010-09
NCT00962026
2013-06
NCT02171416
2018-05
Q10
At the median, Rilonacept's trials enrolled 25 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
25
Largest enrolment
1315
Registered trials counted
26
Q11
What do 337 spontaneous reports say about Rilonacept — 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.
Rilonacept appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 337 reaction mentions were counted: injection site erythema 56; product dose omission issue 46; chest pain 43; injection site pain 39. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL1201830 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
injection site erythema
56
product dose omission issue
46
chest pain
43
injection site pain
39
injection site reaction
35
arthralgia
25
4 more recorded rows
injection site pruritus
25
injection site rash
25
injection site mass
22
pericarditis
21
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q12
Rilonacept and CYP450 and Cytochrome P450: shared by which compounds?
CYP450 and Cytochrome P450 appear in Rilonacept's recorded interaction sentences, 3 in all. openfda-label+europepmc · 2025-12-16
Interpretation drug_interactions
Show the evidence
Cytochrome P450drug_interactions
7.2 Cytochrome P450 Substrates The formation of CYP450 enzymes is suppressed by increased levels of cytokines (e.g., IL-1) during chronic inflammation.
CYP450
drug_interactions
Thus it is expected that for a molecule that binds to IL-1, such as rilonacept, the formation of CYP450 enzymes could be normalized.
drug_interactions
This is clinically relevant for CYP450 substrates with a narrow therapeutic index, where the dose is individually adjusted (e.g., warfarin).
recorded 2025-12-16 · 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.