Efficacy of adalimumab across subgroups of patients with moderate‐to‐severe chronic plaque psoriasis of the hands and/or feet: post hoc analysis of REACH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Randomized Controlled Evaluation of Adalimumab in Treatment of Chronic Plaque Psoriasis of the Hands and Feet (REACH) trial demonstrated that adalimumab was efficacious and well-tolerated for the treatment of hand and/or foot psoriasis through 28 weeks. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of patient baseline characteristics on efficacy of adalimumab treatment of hand and/or foot psoriasis. METHODS: Patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis of the hands and/or feet were randomized 2 : 1 to adalimumab or placebo during the 16 week, double-blind period of REACH. Primary endpoint was percentage of patients achieving Physician's Global Assessment of the hands and/or feet of clear/almost clear at week 16. Post hoc analyses evaluated effects of baseline patient characteristics on the primary endpoint. Patients with nail psoriasis at baseline were assessed for association of Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) 50 response with efficacy outcomes at week 16. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients (49 adalimumab : 23 placebo) were analysed. Greater percentages of adalimumab-treated patients achieved the primary endpoint vs. placebo across all subgroups. Among 31 patients with nail psoriasis, a greater percentage of adalimumab-treated patients achieved NAPSI 50 (56.5%) vs. placebo (12.5%) at week 16. In adalimumab-treated patients, greater percentages of NAPSI 50 Responders vs. Non-responders achieved the primary endpoint, and had greater improvements in erythema, scaling, induration and fissuring, Dermatology Life Quality Index, and pain scores. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab was efficacious in treating chronic plaque psoriasis of the hands and/or feet over 16 weeks, regardless of baseline characteristics. Marked improvement in nail psoriasis among adalimumab-treated patients correlated with significant improvements in skin disease and patient-reported outcomes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".