Outcome
Type |
Measure |
Description |
Time frame |
Safety issue |
Primary |
Percent Change From Baseline in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) at Week 12: Intent-to-Treat (ITT) Analysis |
Adjusted least square (LS) means and standard errors were obtained from the mixed model analysis with repeated measures (MMRM) to account for missing data using all available post-baseline data from Week 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). |
Baseline to Week 12 |
|
Secondary |
Percent Change From Baseline in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol at Week 12: On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted LS means and standard errors were obtained from the MMRM model to account for missing data using all available post-baseline on-treatment data from Week 4 to Week 48 (on-treatment Analysis). |
Baseline to Week 12 |
|
Secondary |
Percent Change From Baseline in Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol at Weeks 24 and 48: ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted LS means and standard errors were obtained from the MMRM model to account for missing data using all available post-baseline data from Week 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Percent Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein (Apo) B at Weeks 12, 24 and 48: ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted LS means and standard errors were obtained from the MMRM model to account for missing data using all available post-baseline data from Week 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Percent Change From Baseline in Non-High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (Non-HDL-C) at Weeks 12, 24 and 48 - ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted LS means and standard errors were obtained from the MMRM model to account for missing data using all available post-baseline data from Week 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Percent Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol (Total-C) at Weeks 12, 24 and 48: ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted LS means and standard errors were obtained from the MMRM model to account for missing data using all available post-baseline data from Weeks 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Percent Change From Baseline in Lipoprotein a (Lp) (a) at Weeks 12, 24 and 48: ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted means and standard errors were obtained from a multiple imputation approach followed by a robust regression model including all available post-baseline data from Week 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on-or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Percent Change From Baseline in High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Weeks 12, 24 and 48: ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted LS means and standard errors were obtained from the MMRM model to account for missing data using all available post-baseline data from Weeks 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Percent Change From Baseline in Fasting Triglycerides (TG) at Weeks 12, 24 and 48: ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted means and standard errors were obtained from a multiple imputation approach followed by a robust regression model including all available post-baseline data from Week 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Percent Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein A1 (Apo A1) at Weeks 12, 24 and 48: ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted LS means and standard errors were obtained from the MMRM model to account for missing data using all available post-baseline data from Week 4 to 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Percentage of Participants Reporting >=15 Percent (%) Reduction in LDL-C Level at Weeks 12, 24 and 48: ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted Percentage were obtained from a multiple imputation approach for handling of missing data including all available post-baseline data from Week 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Absolute Change From Baseline in LDL-C Level at Weeks 12, 24 and 48: ITT Analysis/On-treatment Analysis |
Adjusted LS means and standard errors were obtained from the MMRM model to account for missing data using all available post-baseline data from Week 4 to Week 48 regardless of status on- or off-treatment used in the model (ITT analysis). Although separate analyses of all available data (ITT analysis) and only data collected within a defined time window (On-treatment analysis) were planned, if all values used in the ITT approach were within the on-treatment time window, the on-treatment analysis would be identical to the ITT analysis, thus the results would be identical and a single outcome measure presenting the results for both types of analysis would be provided. |
Baseline to Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|
Secondary |
Number of Participants With Tanner Staging at Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
Tanner stage defines physical measurements of development in children and adolescent based on external primary and secondary sex characteristics. Participants were evaluated for pubic hair distribution, breast development (only females) and genital development (only males), and classified in 3 categories as: Prepubescent (defined as a person just before start of the development of adult sexual characteristics), Pubescent (defined as a person at or approaching the age of puberty), Postpubescent (sexually mature or a person who has completed puberty). |
Baseline, Weeks 12, 24 and 48 |
|