Efficacy and safety of topical WBI‐1001 in patients with mild to moderate psoriasis: results from a randomized double‐blind placebo‐controlled, phase II trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a need for the development of novel non-steroidal topical drugs for the treatment of psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of topical 1.0% WBI-1001 in patients with mild to moderate plaque psoriasis. METHODS: A total of 61 patients with 1-10% body surface area (BSA) covered with plaque psoriasis and a physician's global assessment score (PGA) of 2-4 were randomized (2:1) to receive either 1% WBI-1001 in a cream formulation or placebo, applied twice daily for 12 weeks. Efficacy was evaluated using PGA, BSA and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI). The primary endpoint was the change from baseline (Day 0) in PGA at week 12. RESULTS: The improvement in PGA at week 12 was 62.8% for patients randomized to WBI-1001 when compared with 13.0% for patients randomized to placebo (P<0.0001). At week 12, the proportion of patients who achieved a PGA of clear or almost clear and the mean improvement in BSA were 67.5% and 79.1%, respectively, for patients randomized to WBI-1001, when compared with 4.8% (P<0.0001) and an increase of 9.4% (P<0.0001), respectively, for patients randomized to placebo. More application site adverse drug reactions were observed in patients randomized to WBI-1001 than in those randomized to placebo. These adverse drug reactions were all mild or moderate in intensity. CONCLUSION: Topical WBI-1001 induces rapid and significant improvement in patients with plaque psoriasis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".