Efficacy and Safety of Pimecrolimus Cream 1% in Mild-to-Moderate Chronic Hand Dermatitis: A Randomized, Double-Blind Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic hand dermatitis is common and difficult to treat. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the efficacy of pimecrolimus cream 1% in mild-to-moderate chronic hand dermatitis. METHODS: Adult patients (n = 652) were randomized to pimecrolimus 1% or vehicle cream twice daily with overnight occlusion for 6 weeks, followed by a 6-week open-label pimecrolimus treatment. Primary efficacy was 5-point Investigators' Global Assessment of prospectively selected 'target hand' as treatment success (Investigators' Global Assessment 0 or 1) and treatment failure. Pruritus relief was also assessed. RESULTS: Following double-blind phase treatment, target hand treatment success was achieved in 29.8 and 23.2% of the patients in the pimecrolimus and vehicle groups, respectively (p = 0.057). The proportion of patients experiencing pruritus relief was significantly higher in the pimecrolimus group compared to the vehicle group at all time points throughout the double-blind phase. CONCLUSION: The groups were comparable with respect to treating disease signs. Pruritus relief, however, was significantly greater in the pimecrolimus group.
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".