MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intermittent dosing of fluticasone propionate cream for reducing the risk of relapse in atopic dermatitis patients

2002· article· en· W1965953118 on OpenAlex
Jon M. Hanifin, Aditya K. Gupta, Rukmini Rajagopalan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDosingFluticasone propionateAtopic dermatitisRandomized controlled trialRegimenAdverse effectErythemaSurgeryInternal medicinePediatricsDermatologyCorticosteroid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: One of the most troublesome features of atopic dermatitis (AD) is its chronic relapsing nature, and there is a lack of published evidence on the best treatment strategy for long-term management of the disease. OBJECTIVE: To compare an intermittent dosing regimen of fluticasone propionate (FP) cream 0.05% (twice per week) with its vehicle base in reducing the risk of relapse when added to regular daily emollient in adult and paediatric subjects with stabilized AD. METHODS: Subjects (aged 3 months to 65 years) with moderate or severe AD were enrolled into an open-label Stabilization Phase of up to 4 weeks on daily emollients plus FP twice daily. Those subjects who achieved 'treatment success' (Global Assessment Score </= 2, erythema, pruritus, and papulation/induration/oedema scores </= 1) entered the double-blind Maintenance Phase. They continued with regular emollients and were randomized at a 2 : 1 ratio to either intermittent FP or vehicle, once daily 4 days per week for 4 weeks followed by once daily 2 days per week for 16 weeks. Subjects who relapsed on intermittent FP were discontinued from the study. Those who did not relapse continued for an additional 24 weeks on intermittent dosing for safety monitoring. RESULTS: A total of 372 (247 paediatric, 125 adult) subjects were enrolled into the Stabilization Phase. Of these, 348 (231 children, 117 adults) were randomized into the Maintenance Phase. Analysis of the primary efficacy parameter showed that subjects receiving intermittent FP cream (twice per week), in addition to regular daily emollients in the Maintenance Phase, were 7.7 times less likely to have an AD relapse than subjects receiving intermittent vehicle cream/emollients [Mantel-Haenszel (MH) estimate of the odds ratio, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.6, 12.8; P < 0.001]. Paediatric subjects were 8.1 times less likely to have an AD relapse (95% CI 4.3, 15.2; P < 0.001) and adult subjects were 7.0 times less likely to have an AD relapse (95% CI 3.0, 16.7; P < 0.001). For subjects receiving intermittent FP cream/emollient, the median time to relapse could not be estimated as the majority remained controlled at 20 weeks. For those receiving intermittent vehicle/emollient, the median time to relapse was 4.7 weeks. For paediatric and adult groups, this was 5.1 and 4.1 weeks, respectively. Median exposure to FP for all subjects was 337 days. There was only one study drug-related adverse event (acne) and there were no reports of skin thinning or atrophy associated with the use of FP cream in paediatric or adult subjects. CONCLUSIONS: In paediatric and adult subjects, once stabilized with regular FP treatment, the risk of relapse of AD can be significantly reduced by extended intermittent dosing with FP cream in addition to regular emollient therapy.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it