An update on the long-term safety experience of ustekinumab: results from the psoriasis clinical development program with up to four years of follow-up.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety profile of ustekinumab with up to three years of exposure suggested a favorable benefit-risk profile in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of ustekinumab in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis treated for up to four years. METHODS: Safety data were pooled across four Phase II/III randomized controlled trials. Rates over time and cumulative rates of adverse events (AEs), AEs leading to treatment discontinuation, serious adverse events (SAEs), serious infections, malignancies, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (i.e., cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction [MI], or stroke as adjudicated by an independent panel of academic cardiologists) were evaluated. Observed rates of AEs of interest were compared with those expected in the general (malignancies, MI, and stroke) and psoriasis (serious infections, MI, and stroke) populations. RESULTS: Overall, 3,117 patients were followed for up to four years (6,791 patient-years). Rates of AEs, AEs leading to treatment discontinuation, and SAEs remained stable over time, whereas cumulative rates were generally comparable between patients who received 45 mg and 90 mg of ustekinumab. The rates of AEs of interest also remained stable over time, and cumulative rates per 100 patient-years were 0.80 and 1.32 (serious infections), 0.70 and 0.53 (nonmelanoma skin cancer), 0.63 and 0.61 (other malignancies), and 0.56 and 0.46 (MACE) in patients treated with 45 mg and 90 mg, respectively. Rates of AEs of interest were consistent with those in the general and psoriasis populations. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of long-term ustekinumab treatment with up to four years of continuous use remains consistent with previous reports, with no evidence of cumulative toxicity.
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 | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".