Timolol Maleate 0.5% or 0.1% Gel‐Forming Solution for Infantile Hemangiomas: A Retrospective, Multicenter, Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Therapeutic options for superficial infantile hemangiomas (IH) are limited. Recently, timolol maleate gel, a topical nonselective beta-blocker, has been reported as a potentially effective treatment for superficial IH. This study is an extension of a previously published pilot study designed to further investigate the efficacy and safety and to identify predictors of good response of topical 0.5% or 0.1% timolol maleate gel-forming solution. This was a retrospective cohort study including patients enrolled from five centers. Patients were included if they were treated with timolol maleate 0.1% or 0.5% gel-forming solution and had photographic documentation of the IH and at least one follow-up visit. Patients with concomitant active treatment using other IH treatments were excluded. The primary endpoint was change in the appearance of IH as evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS). Data from 73 subjects were available for final analysis. Timolol maleate gel-forming solution 0.5% was used in 85% (62/73) of patients, the remainder being treated with 0.1%. The median age at treatment initiation was 4.27 months (interquartile range [IQR] 2.63-7.21 mos), and patients were treated for a mean of 3.4 ± 2.7 months. All patients except one improved, with a mean improvement of 45 ± 29.5%. Predictors of better response were superficial type of hemangioma (p = 0.01), 0.5% timolol concentration (p = 0.01), and duration of use longer than 3 months (p = 0.04). Sleeping disturbance was noted in one patient. This study further demonstrates the efficacy and tolerability of topical timolol maleate and gradual improvement with longer treatment in patients with superficial IH.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".