Human study PLS-00111
Randomized dose-escalation trial of elamipretide in adults with primary mitochondrial myopathy.
Version 1 · published November 7, 2026 · evidence through November 7, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.
Only the abstract was available. Essential methods may be missing, which limits what can be judged.
Reports of this study
Every publication, registration and abstract describing this one study. Participants are counted once.
- Randomized dose-escalation trial of elamipretide in adults with primary mitochondrial myopathy.primary · Neurology · 2018-03-02 · PMID 29500292 · DOI · corrected
Design and participants
- Design
- Randomized controlled trial
- Population
- Adults with genetically confirmed primary mitochondrial myopathy (PMM)
- Conditions
- Primary mitochondrial myopathy
- Setting
- Multicenter phase I/II trial; sites not described in the abstract
- Planned enrollment (registry)
- Not reported
- Enrolled
- 36
- Randomized
- 36
- Completed follow-up
- Not reported
- Funding
- PubMed publication type lists Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; the funder is not named in the record
- Authors’ conflicts
- Not stated in the record
Intervention and comparator
What each group received. Related peptides, analogs and combinations are never treated as the compound itself.
- Elamipretide highest dose (intervention) · elamipretide · Elamipretide given as a 2-hour intravenous infusion at the highest of three dose levels, given in a dose-escalating sequence · intravenous · 5 days of treatment · Not reported assigned
- Elamipretide middle dose (intervention) · elamipretide · Elamipretide given as a 2-hour intravenous infusion at the middle of three dose levels · intravenous · 5 days of treatment · Not reported assigned
- Elamipretide lowest dose (intervention) · elamipretide · Elamipretide given as a 2-hour intravenous infusion at the lowest of three dose levels · intravenous · 5 days of treatment · Not reported assigned
- Placebo (comparator) · Placebo given as a 2-hour intravenous infusion · placebo · intravenous · 5 days of treatment · Not reported assigned
What the authors reported
As stated in the sources. This is the authors’ account, not Peptide Library’s assessment.
Change in 6-minute walk test distance
primary outcome · patient-important · Day 5 · Distance walked in the 6-minute walk test (6MWT), change from baseline
- Elamipretide highest dose vs Placebo: change from baseline 64.5, p = 0.053 — Highest-dose group walked a mean of 64.5 m farther at day 5, versus a 20.4 m change with placebo
- Placebo: change from baseline 20.4 — Placebo group changed by 20.4 m at day 5
- Elamipretide highest dose vs Placebo: narrative, p = 0.014 — Dose-dependent increase in 6MWT distance across elamipretide doses
- Elamipretide highest dose vs Placebo: change from baseline 51.2, p = 0.0297 — Covariate-adjusted model: change of 51.2 m with the highest dose versus 3.0 m with placebo
- Placebo: change from baseline 3 — Covariate-adjusted change of 3.0 m in the placebo group
Cardiopulmonary exercise testing parameters
secondary outcome · surrogate · After 5 days of treatment · Changes in cardiopulmonary exercise testing parameters
- Elamipretide highest dose vs Placebo: narrative — No significant differences observed in other efficacy endpoints
Participant-reported symptoms
secondary outcome · patient-important · After 5 days of treatment · Changes in participant-reported symptoms
- Elamipretide highest dose vs Placebo: narrative — No significant differences observed in other efficacy endpoints
Serum and urinary biomarkers
secondary outcome · surrogate · After 5 days of treatment · Changes in serum and urinary biomarkers
- Elamipretide highest dose vs Placebo: narrative — No significant differences observed in other efficacy endpoints
Safety and tolerability
secondary outcome · safety · During 5-day treatment period · Safety and tolerability endpoints
- Elamipretide highest dose vs Placebo: narrative — No significant differences in safety endpoints; authors report no increased safety concerns
Pharmacokinetics
secondary outcome · surrogate · During treatment · Pharmacokinetic parameters of elamipretide
- No results reported.
Adverse events
None reported. That is not evidence of safety.
Monitoring: Safety and tolerability were measured. Specific adverse events and monitoring procedures are not described in the abstract.
The authors concluded (paraphrased): Elamipretide improved exercise performance (6MWT distance) after 5 days in adults with primary mitochondrial myopathy without increased safety concerns. The authors say larger, longer trials are needed.
Peptide Library’s assessment
An automated assessment, made by AI separately from the authors’ conclusions and not reviewed by a person. How risk of bias is assessed.
Limitations
- small or imprecise: Only 36 participants were split across three dose groups and placebo. The unadjusted primary comparison was not significant (p = 0.053).
- short follow up: Efficacy was assessed after only 5 days of treatment, so durability and longer-term safety are unknown.
- selective reporting: Significance was reached only in a dose-trend analysis and a covariate-adjusted model. Other endpoints are reported only as 'no significant differences', without data.
- abstract only: Only the abstract is available. Arm sizes, attrition, allocation methods and adverse event details are not reported.
- other: The PubMed record is flagged as corrected. The nature of the correction is not given in the record.
- funding or conflicts: Funding and conflicts of interest are not stated in the record.
Change in 6-minute walk test distance: High risk of bias (Cochrane RoB 2)
Risk of bias in one result of a randomized trial, judged in five domains.
| Randomization process | Some concerns | The abstract states participants were randomized, but sequence generation and allocation concealment are not described. |
|---|---|---|
| Deviations from intended interventions | Some concerns | The trial is described as double-blind and placebo-controlled, but adherence and deviations are not reported in the abstract. |
| Missing outcome data | Some concerns | The numbers analyzed and completers per arm are not reported in the abstract, so attrition cannot be judged. |
| Measurement of the outcome | Some concerns | The 6MWT is effort-dependent. Blinding is stated, but whether assessors were blinded is not described in the abstract. |
| Selection of the reported result | High risk of bias | The unadjusted primary comparison was non-significant (p=0.053), while the significant result came from an adjusted model; a prespecified analysis plan is not evident. |
Randomized and double-blind, but the abstract-only report leaves randomization, attrition and analysis prespecification unclear.
Version 1 · published November 7, 2026 · evidence through November 7, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · RoB 2 (2019-08-22) · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.
Cardiopulmonary exercise testing parameters: Some concerns (Cochrane RoB 2)
Risk of bias in one result of a randomized trial, judged in five domains.
| Randomization process | Some concerns | Randomization is stated, but methods and concealment are not described in the abstract. |
|---|---|---|
| Deviations from intended interventions | Some concerns | Double-blind design is stated. Deviations from intended interventions are not reported. |
| Missing outcome data | Some concerns | The number analyzed for exercise testing is not given in the abstract. |
| Measurement of the outcome | Some concerns | Exercise testing parameters and blinding of assessors are not specified in the abstract. |
| Selection of the reported result | Some concerns | The result is reported only as no significant differences, with no data and no list of the parameters. |
A narrative null result from an abstract only, with no detail on methods or data.
Version 1 · published November 7, 2026 · evidence through November 7, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · RoB 2 (2019-08-22) · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.
Participant-reported symptoms: Some concerns (Cochrane RoB 2)
Risk of bias in one result of a randomized trial, judged in five domains.
| Randomization process | Some concerns | Randomization is stated, but the methods are not described in the abstract. |
|---|---|---|
| Deviations from intended interventions | Some concerns | Double-blind design is stated. Adherence and deviations are not reported. |
| Missing outcome data | Some concerns | The number of participants with symptom data is not reported in the abstract. |
| Measurement of the outcome | Some concerns | Self-reported symptoms depend on participant blinding. The instruments used are not named in the abstract. |
| Selection of the reported result | Some concerns | The result is given only as no significant differences, with no data per instrument. |
Abstract-only narrative null result. Instruments and data are not available.
Version 1 · published November 7, 2026 · evidence through November 7, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · RoB 2 (2019-08-22) · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.
Serum and urinary biomarkers: Some concerns (Cochrane RoB 2)
Risk of bias in one result of a randomized trial, judged in five domains.
| Randomization process | Some concerns | Randomization is stated, but the methods are not described in the abstract. |
|---|---|---|
| Deviations from intended interventions | Some concerns | Double-blind design is stated. Deviations are not reported. |
| Missing outcome data | Some concerns | The number of samples analyzed is not reported in the abstract. |
| Measurement of the outcome | Some concerns | Laboratory biomarkers are objective, but which biomarkers were measured, and how, is not specified. |
| Selection of the reported result | Some concerns | The result is reported only as no significant differences, without values. |
Abstract-only narrative result with unspecified biomarkers.
Version 1 · published November 7, 2026 · evidence through November 7, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · RoB 2 (2019-08-22) · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.
Safety and tolerability: Some concerns (Cochrane RoB 2)
Risk of bias in one result of a randomized trial, judged in five domains.
| Randomization process | Some concerns | Randomization is stated, but the methods are not described in the abstract. |
|---|---|---|
| Deviations from intended interventions | Some concerns | Double-blind design is stated. Discontinuations are not reported. |
| Missing outcome data | Some concerns | The safety population size and attrition are not given in the abstract. |
| Measurement of the outcome | Some concerns | How adverse events were collected and graded is not described in the abstract. |
| Selection of the reported result | Some concerns | Safety is summarized only as no significant differences, without event counts. |
Safety is reported only narratively in the abstract, with no event data.
Version 1 · published November 7, 2026 · evidence through November 7, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · RoB 2 (2019-08-22) · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.
Claims this study informs
- Improves function in Barth syndrome: not eligible (wrong population) for “Muscle strength, exercise capacity and fatigue”
- Improves exercise capacity in primary mitochondrial myopathy: eligible for “Six-minute walk distance and fatigue”, direct evidence
- Is safe for human administration: eligible for “Adverse events, including injection-site reactions, and discontinuations”, indirect evidence
- Low certainty Six-minute walk distance and fatigue
- Insufficient information to assess Adverse events, including injection-site reactions, and discontinuations
Where each value comes from
- adverse_events: PMID 29500292, abstract (Results, sentence 4) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
- arms: PMID 29500292, abstract (Methods, sentence 2) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
- author_conclusion: PMID 29500292, abstract (Conclusions, sentences 1-2) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
- design: PMID 29500292, abstract (Methods, sentence 1) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
- limitations: PMID 29500292, abstract (Results and Conclusions) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
- outcomes: PMID 29500292, abstract (Methods, sentences 3-5) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
- participants: PMID 29500292, abstract (Methods, sentence 1) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
- population: PMID 29500292, abstract (Methods, sentence 1) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
- results: PMID 29500292, abstract (Results, sentences 1-4) · extracted by AI (automated, not verified by a person) · abstract only
Version 1 · published November 7, 2026 · evidence through November 7, 2026 · research snapshot 2026.1.1 · methodology ev-1 · Automated assessment by AI (claude-opus-5-5 and claude-sonnet-5-5), not reviewed by a person.
These assessments describe published research. Records marked automated were produced by AI under the published methodology and have not been reviewed by a person; they can contain errors. None of this is medical advice, not a statement about any product’s safety for human use, and not a regulatory approval. Peptide Library’s vendor and partner relationships play no part in them (editorial independence).