Open-Label Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Imiquimod 5% Cream Applied Once Daily Three Times per Week in Cycles for Treatment of Actinic Keratoses on the Head
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Local skin reactions are common during imiquimod treatment of actinic keratosis (AK). Cyclical application of imiquimod may improve tolerability while maintaining efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the tolerability of imiquimod and clearance rate of AK lesions after imiquimod application. METHODS: Imiquimod 5% cream was administered three times per week for 4 weeks followed by 4 weeks of rest (cycle 1) to AK lesions on the head. If AK lesions remained visible at the end of cycle 1, a second treatment cycle was instituted. RESULTS: Fifty percent (30 of 60) of patients experienced complete clearance of AK lesions, and 75% (30 of 40) of patients experienced partial clearance of AK lesions after imiquimod treatment at the end of cycle 2. Moreover, 77% of patients who achieved complete clearance had no visible AK lesions 12 weeks post-treatment. Imiquimod was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Imiquimod cycle therapy may be a safe and effective treatment option for AK lesions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".