MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4414927188 · doi:10.1007/s13555-025-01557-1

Bimekizumab Efficacy in Psoriasis by Subgroups: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase 3/3b Clinical Trials

2025· article· en· W4414927188 sur OpenAlexafffund
Bruce Strober, Wolf‐­Henning Boehncke, James G. Krueger, Nina Magnolo, Ronald Vender, Richard B. Warren, José Manuel López Pinto, Sarah Kavanagh, Bengt Hoepken, Paolo Gisondi

Notice bibliographique

RevueDermatology and Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiquePsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
Établissements canadiensDermatrials Research
Organismes subventionnairesManchester Biomedical Research CentreAllerganLEO PharmaNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchIncyteSun PharmaRegeneron PharmaceuticalsUCBCelgeneBiogenValeant Pharmaceuticals InternationalSanofiAmgenMeiji Seika PharmaPfizerEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
Mots-clésClinical trialPost-hoc analysisPsoriasisPost hocPhases of clinical research

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and treatment history can impact the efficacy of biologic treatments in patients with psoriasis. Understanding the efficacy of biologics, such as bimekizumab, across diverse patient subgroups is important for optimising treatment outcomes. Here, we assess whether high overall clinical responses observed in bimekizumab-treated patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis are consistent across subgroups, both versus comparators and with long-term treatment. Data were analysed post hoc from the BE SURE, BE VIVID, and BE READY phase 3 trials, their open-label extension (OLE) BE BRIGHT, and the BE RADIANT phase 3b trial. Patients received either bimekizumab or adalimumab to week 24 (BE SURE), bimekizumab or ustekinumab to week 52 (BE VIVID), and bimekizumab or secukinumab to week 48 (BE RADIANT). In the 3-year pooled analysis (all trials), included patients received bimekizumab continuously from baseline into the OLE. Subgroups of patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis were defined by age, sex, weight, disease duration, disease severity, nail involvement (modified Nail Psoriasis Severity Index > 0), and prior biologic exposure, at baseline. The proportions of patients achieving complete skin clearance (PASI 100; 100% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) in each subgroup are reported alongside 95% confidence intervals (CI). Modified non-responder imputation (mNRI) was used for missing data. Following comparator-controlled periods, the proportion of bimekizumab-treated patients who achieved PASI 100 was consistent across subgroups and numerically greater versus patients who received adalimumab (to week 24), ustekinumab (to week 52), and secukinumab (to week 48) in all subgroups. Among patients who received bimekizumab continuously for 3 years (N = 1107), PASI 100 response rates remained consistent across age (68.6% [40 to < 65 years]–73.7% [≥ 65 years]), sex (69.6% [male]–71.4% [female]), weight (63.4% [≥ 103.9 kg]–75.5% [< 74.3 kg]), disease duration (65.5% [≤ 5 years]–71.1% [> 20 years]), disease severity (67.7% [PASI 12 to < 15]–71.1% [PASI ≥ 20]), nail involvement (69.1% [yes]/71.3% [no]), and prior biologic exposure (71.7% [yes]/69.1% [no]; prior anti-TNF exposure 67.6% [yes]/70.6% [no]) subgroups; 95% CIs overlapped in all instances, indicating no meaningful differences between subgroups. Bimekizumab demonstrated consistently high long-term efficacy in patients with psoriasis across diverse subgroups. Higher rates of PASI 100 were achieved with bimekizumab versus adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab, across all subgroups. These results highlight bimekizumab as an effective treatment for a broad range of people living with psoriasis. NCT03412747, NCT03370133, NCT03410992, NCT03598790, NCT03536884. Psoriasis is a long-lasting skin condition affecting around 1 in every 50 people. Since psoriasis is common, people with the condition differ in terms of who they are, how psoriasis affects them, other health conditions they may have, and past treatments. These differences can affect how a drug works and choosing the correct treatment for individual patients is important. Finding treatments that work equally well across diverse groups of people would help make treatment decisions easier. Previous studies have shown that bimekizumab, a treatment for psoriasis, works better than other treatments (adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab) to completely clear the skin and keep it clear for a long time. To see if these results were consistent across diverse groups of people, we categorised patients into subgroups based on age, sex, body weight, health conditions, psoriasis duration and severity, and prior treatments. We analysed results from people taking bimekizumab and other similar treatments for periods of up to 1 year, as well as those receiving bimekizumab continuously for 3 years. Bimekizumab consistently helped a high number of patients achieve completely clear skin, regardless of their background. In all subgroups, approximately 7 out of 10 patients had completely clear skin after 3 years of continuous bimekizumab treatment. Over periods of up to 1 year, more patients treated with bimekizumab had completely clear skin compared with adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab, in all analysed subgroups. These results indicate that bimekizumab is an effective treatment for a wide range of people with moderate to severe psoriasis.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,068
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,068
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,359

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0680,051
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0100,021
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0030,003
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,048
Tête enseignante GPT0,383
Écart entre enseignants0,335 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2025
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDermatology and TherapyMême sujetPsoriasis: Treatment and PathogenesisTravaux en français237 207