Patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis recapture clinical response during re-treatment with etanercept
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with psoriasis experience remission and gradual reappearance of erythematous and scaly plaques and require individualized treatment over time. A goal of psoriasis treatment is to provide optimal efficacy with a flexible therapeutic regimen that may include treatment pauses. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether patients receiving initial treatment with etanercept who then pause therapy would subsequently recapture response during re-treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of 226 patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis from a large multicentre trial was performed. Patients had received etanercept 50 mg twice weekly subcutaneously until a target clinical response had been achieved, then had paused treatment and eventually relapsed. They were then re-treated with etanercept 25 mg twice weekly. The number of patients recapturing a Physician Global Assessment (PGA) of psoriasis rating of < or = 2 (clear, almost clear or mild) on first re-treatment was assessed. Patient satisfaction during the initial treatment and first re-treatment period was also determined. RESULTS: A total of 187 (83%) patients recaptured the target clinical response of a PGA of < or = 2 after re-treatment. The majority of patients [219 of 226 (97%)] reported satisfaction with etanercept re-treatment. No new safety concerns emerged during re-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In this post-hoc analysis, patients with psoriasis who were re-treated with etanercept 25 mg twice weekly effectively recaptured clinical responses that patients found satisfactory. A flexible treatment option is available to dermatologists and patients for individualized care.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".